SUKHENDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner -complainant, Sukhender, at whose instance FIR No. 152, dated 24.10.2012, for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 323, 341 and 506 read with Section 149, IPC, was registered at Police Station, Bond Kalan, District Bhiwani, against 16 persons, including respondent Nos. 2 to 10, namely, Pardeep, Naveen, Sandeep, Mandeep, Mohit, Vikas, Saroj, Sunita and Phoolwati, on the broad allegation that 16 persons had trespassed into the fields and later caused injuries to Sukhender, Bijender, Sunder, Diwan Singh, Anil Kumar, Suresh, Dalip Singh, Ramesh and Surender, in the village near the house of Amar Singh and Satpal. After obtaining opinion from the doctor, Sections 307 and 325, IPC, were also added. During investigation, respondent Nos. 2 to 10 were found innocent and, as such, the charge -sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) was not presented against them. Thereafter, the case qua other accused was committed to the Court of Session. The charges for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 307, 323, 325, 341, 506 read with Section 149, IPC, were framed. The petitioner -complainant, Sukhender, appeared as PW1 and reiterated the whole narration and specifically named respondent Nos. 2 to 10, who allegedly caused injuries to the above named persons of the complainant side. During course of investigation also, the injured persons supported the prosecution version with regard to the role assigned to respondent Nos. 2 to 10. Thereafter an application under Section 319, Cr.P.C., for summoning of respondent Nos. 2 to 10 as additional accused was presented by the petitioner through Public Prosecutor, but the same was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, vide order dated 30.10.2013, by making the following observations: -

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the parties are ad idem that the impugned order dated 30.10.2013 is not in consonance with the latest pronouncement of a 5 -Judge Bench of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Hardip Singh v. State of Punjab,2014 1 RCR(Cri) 99, and, as such, the matter be remitted to the learned Trial Court for deciding afresh the application moved by the petitioner, Sukhender, through the Public Prosecutor, under Section 319, Cr.P.C., for summoning of additional accused, respondent Nos. 2 to 10 herein. This Court is also of the considered view that the impugned order is not in consonance with the parameters laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Hardip Singh's case . In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present criminal revision petition is allowed. The order dated 30.10.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Trial Court for deciding the application under Section 319, Cr.P.C., afresh. The parties shall appear before the learned Trial Court on the date already fixed before the said Court.