BALWAN Vs. HARI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED -petitioner alleging that he is facing a criminal trial in which a charge under sections 279/337/304-A IPC is framed against him for causing the death of Madan Lal, and again on the complaint filed by Hari Chand-respondent No. 1 on June 15, 1989, charge under sections 302/109/120-B/34 IPC is also framed against him, prays for quashment of complaint Annexure P-4, summoning order Annexure P-5 and the charge Annexure P-6.

(2.) PETITIONER 's learned counsel contends that on the intervening night of 7th and 8th April, 1989, Madan Lal died in a road accident. At that time according to the prosecution, the petitioner was driving jeep No. DED-5244 in the area of village Dhaya. In the case registered under sections 279/337/304-A IPC the prosecution alleged that at the relevant time the petitioner was driving the aforesaid vehicle rashly and negligently and he dashed his jeep against deceased Madan Lal, who not only sustained grievous injuries but also succumbed to them immediately on the spot. A report of this incident was lodged by Jitender son of deceased Madan Lal on April 9, 1989. After holding investigation with regard to this FIR No. 157, the police submitted the charge sheet under sections 279/304-A and 337 IPC in the Court of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar. In that case Addl. CJM Hissar has framed charges for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner and he is facing the trial. But on June 15, 1989, Hari Chand, father of the deceased, lodged the complaint Exhibit P-4 alleging various facts against Satyawati, wife of the deceased, shown as accused No. 4 in that complaint. He alleged that Satyawati was not on cordial terms with the deceased. She along with accused No. 3 Devinder Talwar hatched a conspiracy to commit murder of Madan Lal. On the fateful night petitioner-accused Balwant Singh alias Balwan was driving the aforesaid vehicle in the village. In that vehicle eye-witness Ishwar Singh was sitting. Brother of Satyawati was also sitting in the said vehicle. On seeing Madan Lal on the road accused Balwant Singh and Hawa Singh said that he is the husband of Satyawati whom they are searching, whereupon accused-Balwant Singh drove the vehicle at a fast speed and dashed against pedestrian Madan Lal, hitting him badly on his head. In the complaint it is also averred that thereafter Balwant Singh and Hawa Singh accused got down from the jeep to see whether Madan Lal has breathed his last, and on being satisfied they drove the vehicle again. All these facts were told to Hari Chand by Ishwar Singh.

(3.) THE learned AAG, Haryana, has strongly opposed the petition and contended that no doubt in the case registered under section 304-A IPC also Ishwar Singh is cited as an eye-witness and in the complaint filed by Hari Chand also Ishwar Singh is an eye-witness, but it appears that FIR No. 157 lodged by Jitender son of Madan Lal deceased on April 9, 1989, was not investigated properly. A plain perusal of the FIR indicates that even in this FIR Jitender has expressed a suspicion that his father has been murdered. But with the connivance of ASI Devinder Talwar accused No. 3 the case was registered only under sections 304-A/279/337 IPC. Further, the complaint was filed earlier on June 15, 1989, while the police challan in pursuance of FIR No. 157 was filed later on. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate examined seven witnesses before committing the case to the Sessions Court in the complaint Exhibit P-4. By a detailed order he came to the conclusion that prima facie offence under section 302 IPC is made out and thereafter he committed the case to the Sessions Court. The case registered on the basis of FIR No. 157 is also now consolidated with Sessions case pending under section 302 IPC against the petitioner. So far as the above authority is concerned, the facts are quite distinguishable.