BAKHA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, by means of this. criminal miscellancous under Section 482, Cr.P.C. seeks the quashing of the charge, Annexure PI for offences under Section 302/1481149, IPC framed by the trial Court, relating to FIR No. 212 dated 12.5.1989, registered at Police Station Nissing.

(2.) THE impugned FIR was registered on the statement of Hardip Singh son of partap Singh, resident of Behlolpur. As a result of the occurrence. Partap Si gh is alleged to have died. Karnail Singh (since-deceased), along with Jasbir Singh, Bakha Singh petitioner, Gurmukh Singh and Amir Singh were named therein as the assailants for this offence. After investigation, the Police found Karnail Singh, Bakha Singh petitioner and Amir Singh to be innocent and put in the challan against, Jasbir Singh, Gumukh Singh, Ranjit Singh, Subeg Singh and Sukha Singh. The trial Court firstly framed charges under Section 148, 32. read with Section 149, IPC against Jasbir Singh, Gurmukh Singh, Bikkar Singh, Amir Singh and Karnail Singh (deceased) and in the alternative, it framed charges for offences under Sections 148,302, read with Section 149, IPC against Jasbir Singh, Gurmukh Singh, Ranjit Singh, Sukha Singh and Subeg Singh. The petitioner challenges the framing of the charges on the ground that it was for the prosecution to come out with a clear cut case as to who were the persons who had. committed the crime. The trial Court has acted against the provisions of law by framing the charges in alternative.

(3.) IN Amar Singh and anr. v. The State, AIR 1954 Punjab 106(DB) seven persons were jointly tried at one trial. The charge against the first accused was that he committed P's murder and also committed offences under Sections 307 and 324, Penal Code against certain other persons on a particular day. The other six accused were also charged with the same offences committed against the same persons on that very day. On these facts their Lordships held that the two sets of accused were mutually exelusive and could not be tried. It was observed as under :-