BALWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed against order dated 14.11.2009 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide which an application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning Swaran Singh has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that not only name of Swaran Singh was mentioned in the FIR but a specific role has also been attributed to him. He further contends that the complainant in his examination-in-chief as well as in cross-examination has stated that Swaran Singh had fired a gun shot upon deceased, was armed with Double Barrel gun and also raised a lalkara and being member of unlawful assembly has committed murder which is a very serious offence. It has also been argued by learned Counsel for the petitioner that learned Additional Sessions Judge has wrongly dismissed the application of the prosecution on the ground that the complainant had merely reiterated the allegations which have been made at the time of registration of the FIR. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Rukhsana Khatoon v. Sakhawat Hussain and Ors., 2002 AIR(SC) 2342, Geeta Ram v. Vedi Ram, 2002 10 SCC 499, Anil Singh v. State of Bihar, 2006 13 SCC 421, of this Court in Court of its own motion v. State of Haryana, 2002 1 RCR(Cri) 252 and of Bombay High Court in Sambhaji S/o Nagoba Kendre and Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr., 2008 CrLJ 1123 to support his contention.

(3.) I have heard the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the impugned order.