SUNIL CHAUDHARI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner, Sunil Chaudhari, challenging the order dated 08.10.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, S.A.S.Nagar, Mohali, whereby the petitioner along with his coaccused was ordered to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 307, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149, IPC. Learned counsel contends that the injury attributed to the petitioner on the head of the complainant-injured Satpreet Singh was found to be simple, therefore, he could not be charged for the offence punishable under Section 307, IPC; the injured was related to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, therefore, Section 307, IPC, has been added; the petitioner is a student; the petitioner would lose the right of appeal in case he has to face trial for the offence punishable under Section 307, IPC; there was previous enmity between the private accused and the injured, therefore, the petitioner was falsely implicated.

(2.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that as many as 12 injuries were found on the person of the injured including an injury on his head. The petitioner and his co-accused were armed with deadly weapons and caused numerous injuries on the person of Satpreet Singh. The cumulative effect of the said injury would clearly spells out that the petitioner and his coaccused wanted to commit the murder of Satpreet Singh and that at the time of framing of the charges, the Court has to see that prima facie case for proceeding against the accused was made out. It has also been contended that the learned trial court has given cogent reasons for framing the charges against the petitioner and his co-accused.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record.