LAWS(P&H)-2015-12-458

YOGESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER

Decided On December 10, 2015
YOGESH KUMAR Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 CrPC impugning the order dated 21.9.2015 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, whereby the application moved by him for trying the complaint case as well as the case based on police report jointly, was dismissed. Further prayer has been made seeking direction to the trial Court to hold separate trials in both the complaint case as well as the case based on police report simultaneously and to decide the cases on same day, as both the cases pertain to same occurrence and are therefore, crossversion cases.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the FIR No.315 dated 4.8.2011 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 452, 506, 307 IPC, Police Station Mohindergarh was registered against the petitioner and others and challan was also filed. Since the case being exclusively triable by the Court of Session, it was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Narnaul, where the trial is on the verge of completion. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner and others had also suffered injuries, for which, they had also filed a complaint, but the police colluded with the respondent no.-2 Bhagwan Singh who is complainant in the FIR case. He further submitted that a DDR dated 6.8.2011 was registered, but no action was taken against the accused. On account of inaction on the part of the police for sufficient long time, the criminal complaint was filed by Rajender son of Nathu Ram (who belonged to petitioner's side) on 24.12.2012 in the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Mahendergarh which is now fixed for pre-charge evidence on 23.2.2016.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed upon judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the cases of Harjinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 1985 1 RCR(Cri) 289 and Pal @ Palla v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2010 4 RCR(Cri) 511 to support his contention that when there are cross-version cases, in such a situation, the complaint case and the FIR case be not clubbed together but the same should be tried separately by the same Presiding Officer.