KIRANDEEP KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court impugning the order dtd. 10/1/2022 whereby, the learned trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the prosecution under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning of respondents No.2 to 4.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the learned trial Court has fallen in error in declining the application filed under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning of respondents No.2 to 4. He submits that at the time of lodging of the FIR, the prosecutrix had specifically mentioned the name of the accused/respondents No.2 to 4 that they connived with the main accused and thus, facilitated the rape committed upon the prosecutrix by the co-accused Ramandeep Singh. He further submits that the prosecutrix has also supported the case of the prosecution at the time when her statement under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded. He submits that however, the investigating agency for the reasons best known to it, exonerated the respondents from the offence committed by them and thus, filed the challan only qua co-accused Ramandeep Singh. He submits that at the time of recording of the evidence, the prosecutrix was examined as PW-1 and she reiterated the allegations against the respondents and thus, the complicity of the respondents No.2 to 4 is established beyond reasonable doubt but the trial Court has failed to appreciate the same. He has submitted that in view of the settled law, the trial Court had ample power under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the accused to face the trial along with the coaccused.

(3.) I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.