ANANT RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANANT Ram petitioner is facing trial at Sirsa with respect to offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. By virtue of the present petition, he seeks quashing of the order passed by the learned Additional Judge, Sirsa. The learned trial Court exercising the powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. directed summoning and examining of witnesses to produce the documentary evidence by calling an officer from Army Unit of the petitioner with record regarding his leave, duty and return journey from his native place to his place of posting on 14/15.9.1994 and also the concerned officer from the Railway with record regarding Army journey voucher/ticket of the accused of above said journey.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that on basis of the statement of one Naurang Lal, the first information report had been recorded. He had recited that he had been informed by the villagers that there was blood line in the verandah of Railway Station, Surera. One attache one box made of iron, one gandasa type of weapon were lying therein. The dead body of one woman aged about 25 years and of a boy aged 4-5 years were lying on the right hand side of Nala of the railway station. It was mentioned that dead body of a female child of 4/5 months had been washed away on account of the flow of the water. The injuries had been caused with a sharp edged weapon. The name of the assailant had not been given.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner highlighted the fact that almost arguments had been concluded when the impugned order has been passed. Lacunae could not be permitted to be filled up. The trial court itself was not sure as to what evidence has to be produced. Therefore, direction was given to the Public Prosecutor to give the particulars. He further contended that in such like circumstances, the impugned order cannot be sustained. In addition to that his submission was that such an order prejudicial to the claim of the petitioner should not be passed.