CHAMAN LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 9.9.2011, passed by Additional Sessions, Judge (Adhoc) FTC, Hoshiarpur, whereby the application filed by the petitioner-complainant Chaman Lal, under section 319 Cr.P.C for summoning Leela Devi was dismissed on the ground that Leela Devi was not the active member of the assailing party and did not play any role in causing injuries to petitioner-Chaman Lal.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to impugned order dated 9.9.2011 and states that the Ld. Trial court has observed that except Ranjit Kumar, no other witness stepped into the witness box to corroborate the version put forth by Chaman Lal with regard to the injuries given to him by Leela Devi. He further refers to Annexure P-1, whereby Chaman Lal was examined as PW2 and has categorically stated that Leela Devi gave brick bat blow, which landed on his right hand. He submits that the Ld. Trial court failed to consider the vital aspect of the case and has wrongly passed the order dated 9.9.2011.

(3.) From the perusal of the order dated 9.9.2011, it is apparent that Complainant Ranjit Kumar was examined as PW1 and his version has been corroborated by PW2. The Ld. Trial court recorded that there was no one to corroborate the stand of the complainant Ranjit Kumar. Annexure P-1 is the statement of Chaman Lal, whereby he was examined as PW2. He has specifically stated that he received injuries at the hands of Leela Devi. The Ld. Trial court has ignored this aspect of the case and observed that the witness has not stepped into the witness box. Thus, generally, an order rejecting application for summoning an additional accused is not interfered with by this Court but in exceptional circumstances, where the impugned order is perverse and miscarriage of justice, this Court justifiably interferes in such cases. In this case, the evidence of the witness prima facie indicated that Smt. Leela Devi gave brick bat blow to Chaman Lal. It is a fit case where Leela Devi @ Leela may be tried alongwith other co-accused as an additonal accused.