IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Criminal Rev.876 of 2008
DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 17, 2008
KAMAL DUTT & ANR. ....... PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA .... RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: Mr. RM Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Narender Sura, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, Advocate, for the complainant.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)
Challenge in this petition is to order dated 22.4.2008, passed
by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby while exercising
jurisdiction under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners
have been summoned as additional accused.
The relevant consideration is contained in para-9 of the
impugned order, which reads as under:-
“9. The post mortem report manifests that the deceased was
having one incised wound in the chest, two incised wounds in
the ribs and two incised wounds on scalp of fronto parietal
area. These injuries were apparently caused with sharp
weapon. The medicolegal report of Bhagwanti reveal that she
had sustained two injuries in left hand caused with blunt
weapon, one small abrasion on right side of neck and an injury
Criminal Rev.876 of 2008 2in left arm just above elbow joint caused with sharp weapon.
She was also found complaining of pain in right side incisor
tooth which was bleeding and was found slightly loose.
Conjuctural haemorrhage in her right eye was also noticed.
Yadram PW has deposed that Kamal and Deva had caused
injuries with knife to the deceased and his mother Bhagwanti
while an injury to Bhagwanti was caused with danda even by
accused Saheb. Presence on the person of victims of such
injuries which were caused with sharp edged weapon and
blunt weapon corroborates his version. The occurrence took
place inside the house of deceased. It is somewhat not
possible that only one assailant took risk of challenging the
victims in their house. This fact coupled with the number of
injuries and nature of weapons to a considerable extent
suggest involvement of more than one assailant in the
commission of the crime. Considering the case from this
perspective, Yadram’s evidence in the wake of medical
evidence collected during investigation unfolds a reasonable
prospect about involvement of Kamal and Saheb Singh in the
crime.”
On a consideration of the issue, I find that the court has taken
into account the fact that the deceased and the injured had received
injuries with sharp edged weapon as also blunt weapon. The deceased
was having sharp edged weapon injury. Bhagwanti had received two
injuries with blunt weapon on her left hand; one abrasion on the right side
of neck and an injury on left arm, just above elbow joint, caused with
sharp edged weapon. She was also complaining of pain in the right side
incisor tooth.
Yadram, who had appeared as a prosecution witness, had
deposed that Kamal (petitioner No.1) and Deva had caused injuries with
Criminal Rev.876 of 2008 3
knife to the deceased while while injuries on the person of Bhagwanti
were caused by Sahab (petitioner No.2).
When the matter is considered, I find that the trial court has
taken into account various parameters that need to be considered while
exercising jurisdiction under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure.
No ground for interference is made out.
The petition is dismissed.
September 17, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE