MANOHAR LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition lays challenge to order dated 04.05.2013, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pathankot, whereby the application filed by the complainant for summoning Sarwan Kumar and his wife Dimple as additional accused, has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, Manohar Lal, father of Neeraj Kumari (since deceased) wife of Rajinder Kumar (already facing trial) lodged FIR No.07 dated 22.02.2012 for offence under Sections 304-B, 302 IPC at Police Station Sadar Pathankot. After completion of investigation formalities, challan was presented in the Court, in which, only Rajinder Kumar, husband of the deceased was arrayed as an accused. Sarwan Kumar, elder brother of Rajinder Kumar and Dimple wife of Sarwan Kumar were declared innocent and kept in column No. 2.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that Manohar Lal in the first information report levelled specific allegations against Sarwan Kumar and Dimple in regard to their involvement in the crime and committing cruelty with the deceased in connection with demand of dowry. He has invited attention of this Court to the statement of Manohar Lal, complainant and Vikas Sharma, brother of the deceased, in order to contend that in view of evidence available on record, there is reasonable prospect of Sarwan Kumar and Dimple being convicted of the offence under Section 304-B IPC. It is further submitted that at the stage of summoning of additional accused, the Court is not required to minutely examine the evidence and conclude whether case of conviction is made out or not. At that stage, only a reasonable prospect of conviction is to be seen.