JAGVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order dated 28-7-1995 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran, whereby the petitioner Jagvinder Singh has been summoned under S. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) to face trial for the offences under Ss. 326/324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of this revision are that on 3-4-1994, Sarbjit Singh lodged F.I.R. No. 23 with the Police Station Gobindwal, Tarn Taran. He alleged that on 1-4-1994, he was going to his house after making necessary shopping in connection with the marriage of his cousin on a tractor trolley. At about 2 p.m. when he reached near the house of Ajit Singh, the petitioner armed with a datar, Sukhwinder Singh armed with a datar, Gurvinder Singh armed with a 'dang' and Ravinder Singh armed with a handle of a spade came out of the house of Ajit Singh. On exhortation given by Gurvinder Singh, the petitioner gave a datar blow which hit the left arm near the wrist of the complainant. Sukhwinder Singh gave a datar blow on forehead. Gurvinder Singh and Ravinder Singh caught him from his long hair and gave him injuries with the handle of the spade and dang. The occurrence was witnessed by Kartar Singh and Peithipal Singh.

(2.) On the basis of the above First Information Report, the petitioner along with others was arrested but was granted bail by the Court. After investigation, the petitioner was found to be innocent by the Superintendent of Police (D) and got discharged from the Court vide order dated 9-9-1994. Remaining three accused were sent up for trial. A charge was framed against them. The complainant Sarbjit Singh (respondent No. 2 herein) was examined as a prosecution witness. In his examination-in-chief he supported the entire version given by him in the First Information Report and was also cross-examination to some extent. However the cross-examination was deferred under the orders of the Court.

(3.) On an application moved by the said complainant under S. 319 of the Code, the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, by the impugned order came to the conclusion that there was sufficient evidence on the record to summon the petitioner as an accused to face trial for the offences mentioned above and accordingly the petitioner was ordered to be summoned for 26-8-1995. The relevant portion of the impugned order reads as under :-