ATMA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are facing the trial in case FIR No. 123 dated 1.8.1995 under Sections 465/468/471/420/209/193/120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali Bathinda, have filed this criminal revision against the order dated January 24, 2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, whereby on the revision filed by the State, order dated 18.9.2004 passed by the trial Court discharging the accused, has been set aside.

(2.) IN this case, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda vide order dated 18.9.2004 dropped the proceedings against the accused on the ground of limitation and discharged them. The revisional Court has set aside that order while observing that in this case the challan was presented in the Court, and thereafter the cognizance was taken and charge framed against the accused. Thereafter, the only stage is final judgment of conviction or acquittal, but the Judicial Magistrate cannot review its order and discharge the accused.

(3.) AFTER hearing the counsel for the parties, I do not find any substance in the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioners. Undisputedly, in this case the charge was framed and the case was at the stage of the prosecution evidence when the trial Court discharged the accused. In my opinion, the revisional Court has rightly observed that after framing of the charge, the only stage is to record the evidence and then to conduct the trial on merits. After framing of the charge, the stage is either acquittal or conviction and not discharge. The judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners are arising from the final judgment and are distinguishable on facts. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. 6. Dismissed. 7. However, keeping in view the facts of the case, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. Petition dismissed.