STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. KRISHAN LAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by the State of Punjab, against the order dated 29.4.2003 passed by SDJM, Gidderbaha, discharging the Respondents of the offences under Sections 217, 218 and 120 IPC.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are that FIR No. 26 dated 4.2.1999 under Sections 302, 307/149, 148 and 120 -B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 was registered against Krishan Lal -Respondent No. 1 and others in Police Station Sadar Dabwali, regarding murder of Baldev Singh and, as per the contents of that FIR, the murder was committed on 4.2.1999 at 5 p.m. in village Abub. Krishan Lal -Respondent No. 1, in connivance with other Respondents, managed to get registered against him FIR No. 12 dated 4.2.1999 under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914. As per the contents of that FIR, 12 bottles of Indian made foreign whisky, make 'Red Night' were recovered from the possession of that Respondent on 4.2.1999 at 3.30 p.m. in the limits of Killianwali. On verification, it transpired that the FIR under the Excise Act was got registered by Respondent No. 1 under a deep rooted conspiracy in connivance with the other Respondents, in order to get the benefit in the murder case. Detailed letter dated 18.4.1999 was written by DSP, Malout, to SSP, Muktsar, containing the facts, which transpired during the inquiry conducted by him and on the basis thereof FIR No. 103 dated 24.5.2002 was registered in Police Station, Lambi, District Muktsar, under Sections 217, 218 and 120 IPC. In the course of investigation, statements of the witnesses were recorded and relevant documents were taken into possession. The accused were arrested. After completion of the investigation, the challan was put in before the SDJM, Gidderbaha, who, vide aforesaid order, discharged the accused on the ground that Krishan Lal -Respondent No. 1 had been convicted for the offence under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 in FIR No. 12 dated 4.2.1999 and that no appeal or revision was filed against that conviction and, as such, there was no prima facie case against the Respondents, having committed the offences under Sections 217, 218 and 120 IPC.

(3.) IN view of the above findings and directions, recording of conviction of Krishan Lal -Respondent No. 1 in the excise case and non -filing of appeal/revision against that conviction could not have been made ground for discharging the accused. In fact, the State could not have filed appeal or revision against that conviction. The trial court was to look into all the evidence collected during the investigation before making up its mind, whether there was sufficient grounds for presuming that the Respondents/accused committed the offences, so mentioned in the challan. Therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained.