SURJIT SINGH PATHANIA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition takes exception to the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala, whereby he dismissed the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order, dated 11.03.2008, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate -I, Nurpur wherein charges framed against the petitioner had been questioned.

(2.) SHORN of all unnecessary details, the facts of the case as necessary for the adjudication of this case are that the complainant PW -1, lodged a complaint in police station that her husband had been abducted by some persons. After the investigation, the police filed the charge -sheet wherein the petitioner was not arraigned as an accused. However, in a complaint made before the learned trial Court under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C.) by the prosecution, the learned trial Court on 19.12.2002, passed an order for addition of the accused in the ongoing trial. This order was challenged by the petitioner before the learned Sessions Judge, which order has been assailed before this court.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Anoop Chitkara, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Virender Kumar Verma, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.