MAN MOHAN SINGH Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition filed under s. 661 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the commitment order dated 31st July, 1972, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala, D) committing the petitioner Man Mohan Singh son of Inder Singh resident of Patiala to stand his trial in the Court of Sessions under section 307, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE facts of this case are that Gurcharan Singh owned a poultry farm near T.B. Hospital. Patiala, and on 22nd August, 1969, at about 9.30 P.M. he went to wards Sheranwala Gate, Patiala, to purchase some ice from Lal Chand, Man Mohan Singh petitioner and one Chaman Lal were already present on the ice depot of Lal Chand and on seeing Gurcharan Singh they exhorted that he should not be allowed to escape that day. The petitioner and Chaman Lal took out knives from their pockets and inflicted two injuries on the chest of Gurcharan Singh. Chaman Lal also inflicted a knife injury on the right arm of Gurcharan Singh Balwant Singh and Gurdial Singh were the eye witnesses and they rescued Gurcharan Singh from the accused. They took the injured Gurcharan Singh to the Civil Hospital, Patiala, where he was medically examined. A case under section 307/24, Indian Penal Code, was registered against them. Chaman Lal accused has absconded and has not yet been arrested. Chalan against Man Mohan Singh petitioner alone was submitted in Court. The prosecution examined in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, the doctor who examined Gurcharan Singh injured besides the two eye witnesses. Gurdial Singh (P. W.) and Balwant Singh (P. W. 4.) They also examined Dr. Vir Bhan Garg who conducted the X -ray examination of the injuries on the person of Gurcharan Singh. Gurcharan Singh injured after the occurrence had died a natural death before he was examined in Court. In the revision petition it was alleged that both the eye -witnesses did not support the prosecution story, that the Judicial Magistrate wrongly relied on the first information report made by Gurcharan Singh deceased and illegally passed the commitment order and the same, therefore be quashed. Notice of this revision petition was issued to the State of Punjab and the records were summoned.

(3.) IN the instant case the allegations made against the accused did constitute the offence alleged. But the contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that there is no legal evidence adduced in support of those allegations and the accused should have been discharged by the Committing Magistrate and the order of commitment is manifestly wrong and illegal.