MANDEEP KAUR Vs. SNEH LATA SANDHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-Mandeep Kaur has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of impugned order dated 03.11.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur in complaint titled as "Dr. Sneh Lata vs. Mandeep Kaur" wherein an application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent to summon Jasvir Singh and Sandhya Rani as eye witnesses of the occurrence has been allowed by the trial Court.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that respondent filed a complaint under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 506 IPC against the petitioner. Complainant filed other complaint against her husband Dr. Majit Singh and four other persons under Sections 452, 506, 376, 511, 304 and 354 IPC, which is pending at the preliminary stage. During course of preliminary evidence, complainant herself stepped into the witness box as PW1 and instead of examining the witnesses i.e. Avtar Singh and Sohan Singh, one Renu was examined as CW-2. Said application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been allowed vide order dated 03.11.2018, which is subject matter of challenge in the present petition.

(3.) As per contents of the complaint, on the date of occurrence i.e. 14.01.2016, Jasvir Singh and Sandhya Rani were present in the dispensary along with other witnesses mentioned in the list of witnesses as well as in the complaint. Both the witnesses are material witnesses. The application for summoning two witnesses was filed to which, reply was also filed. In the reply, contents of the application were denied stating that in the complaint nowhere it was stated that Jasvir Singh and Sandhya Rani were also witnesses to the occurrence. After commencement of the trial, complainant herself appeared as witness before the trial Court and in her examination-inchief, she never disclosed that said persons were also witnesses to the occurrence. Said application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has wrongly been allowed.