RAJU Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 04.06.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Karnal whereby he allowed the application under Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') moved by the prosecution and the petitioner was summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 120 -B, 148, 307, 325, 323, 506, 285 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').

(2.) A case bearing FIR No. 537 dated 17.07.2013 was registered at Police Station Sadar Karnal on the statement of complainant Rajesh Kumar. The occurrence took place on 17.07.2013. The relevant part of the FIR relating to the occurrence as incorporated in Annexure P -1 is as follows: -

(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner argues that the petitioner was not named in the FIR. During police investigation, he was found innocent. The statement of complainant recorded by the trial Court was in contradiction to the statement recorded by the police at the time of recording the FIR. The trial Court has also taken into account the statement of another injured of the occurrence namely Sushil Kumar recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He has relied upon the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Babubhai Bhimabhai Bokhiria & Anr. Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors., 2014(3) Criminal Court Cases 194, wherein it has been observed that while recording its satisfaction under Section 319 Cr.P.C., the Court has to satisfy itself on the basis of evidence led during trial. On the strength of the above argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the statement of injured Sushil Kumar recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. could not be taken into consideration by the trial Court while summoning the petitioner as an additional accused.