Sukhwinder Singh @ Binder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 25 February, 2009

Crl.Rev.No.448 of 2009                                                 1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH.



                                       Crl.Rev.No.448 of 2009
                                       Date of Decision: 25.2.2009

Sukhwinder Singh @ Binder Singh                          .....Petitioner

                                Vs.

State of Punjab                                          ....Respondent

                                ....

CORAM :        HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA

                                ****

Present :      Mr. Mohd.Yousaf, Advocate for the petitioner.
               Mr.Abhishek Chautala, AAG, Punjab.

                                ....

RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)

By way of present petition, the petitioner impugns an order

dated 7.2.2009, passed by the Special Court, Patiala, disallowing the

summoning of Zimni No.10 dated 10.12.2001.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that after a thorough

investigation by the Superintendent of Police (HQ), Patiala, the petitioner

was discharged. He was subsequently summoned under Section 319 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner made an attempt to summon

the aforementioned enquiry file, but as the enquiry file was not traceable, he

filed an application for summoning of Zimni No.10 dated 10.12.2001,

which refers to the enquiry and for summoning of witnesses given up by the

prosecution. The learned trial Court allowed the summoning of the

witnesses, but declined the prayer for summoning of Zimni No.10 dated
Crl.Rev.No.448 of 2009 2

10.12.2001, on the ground that a zimni recorded by the police during

investigation cannot be summoned, as evidence. It is submitted that at the

stage of summoning additional evidence, a Court cannot consider the weight

to be attached to a particular piece of evidence and, therefore, the revision

petition be allowed and the impugned order be set aside.

Counsel for the State of Punjab, on the other hand, submits that

as the impugned order does not suffer from any error of jurisdiction or of

law, the present petition be dismissed. The petitioner has no vested right to

summon a zimni recorded during investigation, as a zimni is a mere record

of the Investigating Officer’s investigation.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

impugned order.

The learned trial Court has rejected the petitioner’s prayer for

summoning the zimni by holding that a zimni cannot be summoned in

evidence. The question that required consideration was, whether the

contents of the zimni are relevant to the petitioner’s defence or not. Its

evidentiary value and the weight to be assigned are to be considered during

the trial. The petitioner has been compelled to summon the zimni, as the

original report declaring him innocent is not traceable.

In view of what has been stated herein above, the present

petition is allowed. The order dated 7.2.2009 is set aside, insofar as it

declines the prayer for summoning Zimni No.10 dated 10.12.2001. The

learned trial Court shall direct the concerned office to produce Zimni No.10

dated 10.12.2001 on a date to be fixed by the trial Court. It is, however,

made clear that this order shall have no bearing on the evidentiary value or

weight to be assigned to Zimni No.10 dated 10.12.2001.
Crl.Rev.No.448 of 2009 3

Parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on

19.3.2009.

25.2.2009                                    (RAJIVE BHALLA)
GS                                                JUDGE