Charanjit Kaur And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 10 March, 2009

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH


                  Criminal Misc. No. M-25170 of 2008
                    Date of decision: 10th March, 2009

Charanjit Kaur and others

                                                             ... Petitioners

                                 Versus

State of Punjab and another
                                                          ... Respondents

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:    Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate for the petitioners.
            Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General Punjab
            for the State.


KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

seeking quashing of the complaint dated 28th February, 2003 (Annexure

P-2) instituted under Sections 323, 504, 506, 148, 149, 452 read with

Section 34 IPC and Section 4 & 5 of Schedule Tribe (Untouchability) Act.

First grievance of the petitioner is that name of the Act

mentioned is wrong. Right name of the Act and provisions will read as

‘Section 3 & 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act, 1989’. It is stated that Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana,

while issuing summons, has also not applied his mind to the correct

provisions of the law. Secondly, it has been submitted that there are

discrepancies and contradictions in the testimony of witnesses.

Complainant had stated that she was called by bad names by calling the

name of ‘Kuttian, Churian, Chamrian’, when the accused entered in her

house, whereas, daughter has stated that accused stated so when they

were leaving the house. Thirdly, it has been submitted that after these
Criminal Misc. No. M-25170 of 2008 2

words were used, thereafter, noise was raised by the complainant and

then witnesses were attracted. Counsel has stated that in that situation,

witnesses should not have heard the words cited by the complainant.

These all submissions made by counsel for the petitioners,

are in the realm of appreciation of evidence. This Court cannot tread on

the path of appreciation of evidence, as canvassed by counsel for the

petitioners, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore,

present petition cannot be entertained and the same is liable to be

dismissed.

However, taking into consideration that ten persons were

named as accused, personal appearance of the petitioners, before the

trial Court, is exempted, subject to their filing an undertaking that they

shall cause their appearance as and when required by the trial Court.

They shall also file an undertaking that the evidence, if any, recorded in

their absence but in the presence of their counsel, shall be binding upon

them. The trial Court may incorporate any other conditions in the

undertaking to be submitted by the accused.

At this stage, counsel for the petitioners has submitted that

petitioner No.6 Sucha Singh also belongs to Scheduled Caste.

Let the petitioner No.6 prove before the trial Court, that he

also belongs to Scheduled Caste. There is no doubt that necessary

benefit shall flow to him. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within

a period of one year, after receipt of certified copy of this order.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE
March 10, 2009
rps