RAM KARAN ALIAS RODA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEGAL position in regard to summoning a person as an additional accused under the provisions of Section 319 Cr.P.C. is by now fairly certain/settled and may not call for much detailed discussion. Still the grievances are being routinely made either for and against the order summoning a person to face trial as an accused found innocent during investigation. This may be because the law as settled and fine tuned by various judgments is still required to be applied to the facts in each case. Since it is a matter of law being applied by courts, it can obviously lead to different applications making the effected persons aggrieved against such an order. The present one appears to be a case where the accused has been summoned while ignoring the principles laid down in various judicial pronouncements and hence the grievance by way of present petition. Before noticing these principles governing the exercise of powers under Section 319 of the Code, it would be appropriate to make reference to the facts of this case in brief and see if the principles of law so settled have been correctly applied or not.

(2.) ONE Pyare Lal disappeared from his house on 29.1.2006. Despite vigorous efforts made by his son to search, he could not be traced. Ultimately, FIR was lodged on 30.1.2006 by the son of said Pyare Lal revealing that his father had gone for a stroll on the evening of 29.1.2006 and had not returned thereafter. In the process of tracing his father, the complainant son while proceeding towards Kalka noticed a small gathering near Super Station Service, Ram Nagar, Kalka. On reaching the spot, he noticed a dead body of a person lying there in a vacant shop of Hans Raj, which he identified to be the body of his father Piare Lal. Bleeding injuries with sharp edged weapon were noticed on the body of the deceased. Allegation of murder by some unknown persons was, accordingly, made. Expressing his suspicion, the complainant also disclosed in the FIR that his mother had gone to petrol pump of Lachhman Singh searching for her husband when Sanju salesman had told her that her husband was seen going uphill alone. The complainant further disclosed that one person named Roda was seen standing near the Super Service Station at about 8/9 p.m. Disclosing that his father usually shared drinks with Roda and Khila Ram, accusing finger was pointed at them for commission of murder. On 30.1.2006 only statement of Lalit, another son of the deceased, was recorded by the police, who disclosed that he had last seen the petitioners and one Rajinder Kumar on the night of 29.1.2006 while they were having drinks together. The wife of the deceased while making her statement disclosed that Rajinder Kumar had borrowed a sum of Rs. 20,000/- from her husband and when her late husband demanded the same, it led to some acrimony between the two. Accordingly, the petitioners and said Rajinder Kumar were named in the FIR which led to their arrest. During investigation, police recovered blood stained weapon through Rajinder Kumar and also ash of burnt clothes, which he was allegedly wearing at the time of occurrence. No recovery, however, was effected from the petitioners though one disclosure statement is attributed to them that they had used iron rods. The injuries found on the body of the deceased were of incised wounds. Finding no evidence against the petitioners, they both were discharged by the Court of Illaqa Magistrate. They were released from custody and placed in column No. 2 in the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.

(3.) COUNSEL for petitioners has vehemently argued that no case for summoning the petitioners as per the parameters settled by law is made out and has, accordingly, submitted that the impugned order summoning the petitioners cannot be sustained. Drawing my attention to the statement (Annexure P-2) now made by PW-1 Lalit, the counsel would contend that he has not attributed any role to the petitioners and his statement is identical to the one, which he had given during the course of investigation. Except for stating that this witness had seen his father, Roda alias Ram Karan, Rajinder Kumar and Raj Kumar taking liquor in the shop of Rajinder tailor, he has not attributed anything to the petitioners. In fact statement of this witness would also reveal that though his father had not returned during the night but he had gone to attend his college on the next morning unmindful about his missing father and he was informed through telephone by his brother when the latter discovered the dead body of their father lying near Super Service Station, Kalka.