RAKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The contour of the facts & material, which needs a necessary mention, for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, is that, initially, in the wake of complaint of petitioner-complainant Rakesh Kumar (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against accused Jagdish son of Ganpat, Sumit, Ram Chander sons of, Nirmala wife of, Jagdish and Brahm Parkash son of Nityanand, vide FIR No.240 dated 13.11.2010 (Annexure P1) on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 148, 307, 323, 452 and 506 read with section 149 IPC by the police of Police Station Narnaul.

(2.) During the course of investigation of the case, accused Nirmala Devi and Brahm Parkash were found innocent. However, after completion of the investigation, the police submitted the challan/final police report, in terms of section 173 Cr.PC against the remaining three accused. They were accordingly charge sheeted for the commission of indicated offences and the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges against the accused, examined PW1 complainant Rakesh Kumar, who made his statement (Annexure P6). As soon as his examination-in-chief was recorded, in the meantime, the prosecution moved an application u/s 319 Cr.PC to summon Nirmala Devi and Brahm Parkash respondents as additional accused to face the trial along with their other co-accused.