1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. 28126-M of 2009
Date of Decision: 8.10.2009
***
Harbans Kaur & Ors.
.. Petitioners
Vs.
Sohan Singh
.. Respondent.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,
Present:- Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate
for the petitioners.
***
ARVIND KUMAR, J.
The petitioners are seeking quashing of criminal complaint
No.75 dated 1.8.2006, under Sections 307, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC, titled as
Sohan Singh Vs. Bachittar Singh & Ors. filed by the respondent and also to
the order dated 24.1.2009 whereby the petitioners have been summoned by
the Judicial Magistrate Ist class, Ludhiana for commission of the aforesaid
offences.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have also
gone through the paper book carefully.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioners has confined his arguments as to the legality of the summoning
order dated 24.1.2009 and has contended that the impugned order reveals
non-application of judicious mind by the learned court below and has been
passed in a mechanical manner.
The arguments have been scanned.
The impugned order reveals that the learned Court below while
reproducing the allegations of the complaint and mentioning the names of
the witnesses examined by the complainant and documents proved by them,
in the concluding para observed that there are sufficient grounds for
proceeding against the accused for the offences under Sections 307, 323,
2
506, 148, 149 IPC and proposed to issue the process against them.
However, a perusal of the impugned order reveals that nothing has been
discussed therein as to what was the nature of evidence produced by the
complainant to substantiate the allegations, which proves sufficient for the
court below to summon the petitioners under the aforesaid provisions of
Indian Penal Code. Summoning of an accused in a criminal offence is a
serious matter and criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of
routine. The order summoning a person as an accused must reflect that the
Court has applied its mind and has examined the nature of allegations made
in the complaint and the evidence, both oral as well as documentary. The
Court cannot sit as a silent spectator and has to first undertook the test of
prima facie case against a person against whom the offence is complained
of.
In view of this, the impugned order passed by the learned
court below cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. The matter is
remitted back to the court below with a direction to first withdraw the
process issued against the petitioners pursuant to order dated 24.1.2009,
which since has been set aside and then to pass afresh order on the point of
summoning of the petitioners, without being influenced by any observation
made in this order.
Disposed of.
(ARVIND KUMAR)
JUDGE
October 8,2009
Jiten