AMARJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition quashing of the complaint is sought. The complaint filed is under various sections including Section 440, I.P.C., which is a major section, and other allegations, to effect. that by trespassing in the land, the petitioners took away crops worth, Rs. 50,000/ -. Since the Section 440, I.P.C. is triable by applying warrant procedure in a case filed on private complaint, the Magistrate should have afforded an opportunity the accused to put -forth their case before the Magistrate decides to proceed further. The material before me does not clarify whether the process was issued by the Magistrate after applying his mind to the facts of the case. It is submitted before me that forty four accused were unnecessarily harassed. Among these accused, there is a public officer (Sh. Gian Singh Ball G.A. to the Deputy Commissioner). The Magistrate did not seem to have considered that aspect.

(2.) THE counsel for the petitioners submitted that in order to put the case before the Magistrate all these 44 accused will have to appear before the court, at least for initial bail. In view of that possible plight to which the accused would be forced to face, I hereby direct to until the presence of the accused would be found necessary before the Court, they may be allowed to be represented by duly authorised Advocate, as per Section 205 of the Procedure Code. The Magistrate is further director to afford an opportunity to the accused to place before him such material which they would like to place in order to spell out the case the accused deserve discharge. With these observations this petition stands disposed of.