ANUJ YADAV Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present revision under Section 401 Cr.P.C. for challenging the order dated 31.1.2014 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari summoning him under Section 319 Cr.P.C. as an additional accused for committing offences under Sections 306/34 IPC.

(2.) THE police had initially booked Dinesh and Manoj for committing offences under Sections 306/34 IPC for having abetted the commission of suicide by Ashish Rao, son of complainant -Arun Rao, who was a student of Class 12 in Government Boys Senior School, Rewari by hanging himself. During investigation of the case, complainant Arun Rao named the petitioner and his father Paras Yadav, Cricketer Manoj Yadav, Harpal, Gaurav Bhargav, Naveen Yadav, Kaki, Vikrant and Aryan as being involved in the crime. According to him, all of them used to talk to his son Ashish Rao on his mobile and on face -book. Claiming that despite his providing information about the petitioner and others of being involved in the crime, the police did not challan them, he filed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. through the learned Public Prosecutor for summoning Anuj Yadav and others as additional accused. The said application was partly allowed by additional Sessions Judge, Rewari by summoning the petitioner as well as Paras Yadav and Cricketer Manoj Yadav as additional accused for facing trial for the offences under Sections 306/34 IPC.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the petitioner and after perusing the impugned order, this Court finds that the petitioner had rightly been summoned by the trial Court under Section 319 Cr.P.C. as an additional accused. The name of the petitioner, as an accused/suspect figured in the FIR (Annexure P - 2) which was lodged on the statement of complainant Arun Rao on 28.6.2013. He had stated that after he had checked the phone and the face -book accounts, he came across very disturbing and surprising facts. Some of the persons with whom his son remained in contact on mobile and face -book were engaged in malpractices and illegal transactions of various kind making his son as their prey and dealing with him in such a way that he had no other option but to end his life. Those persons included the present petitioner also. Further, the petitioner and his father had made Ashish Rao to sign blank papers and execute affidavits under threat and terror, which left a lasting impression on his mind. Even while appearing as PW1, complainant Arun Rao deposed that on 7.5.2013, he had submitted a complaint to the SHO, Police Station Model Town, Rewari besides supplying photocopy of the face -book account of his deceased son and also asked the police to take action after verifying the facts stated therein. He had also disclosed the name of the petitioner, his father Paras Yadav, Cricketer Manoj Yadav, Vikrant, Aryan etc. but despite the same, the police had not challaned them. In such a situation, the petitioner stood rightly summoned as an additional accused. The argument raised on behalf of the petitioner that the ingredients of the offence of abetment to commission of suicide are not established cannot be looked into, at this stage, especially when the police has already presented the challan against Dinesh and Manoj for committing offences under Sections 306/34 IPC and they stood charged for the same.