In CRR-254 of 2021-PUNJ HC-Power to summon cannot be exercised mechanically and criminal law cannot be put into motion at whims and caprice of anyone: P&H HC
Justice Jagmohan Bansal [27-02-2023]

Read Order: Rimpy Bawa v. State of Punjab and Others

Monika Rahar 

Chandigarh, February 28, 2023: While dismissing a petition assailing Trial Court's order rejecting  a woman's application for summoning family members of the man with whom she had an extramarital affair, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has observed that the power to summon anyone cannot be exercised mechanically.

"It causes mental and physical agony to a proposed accused. It is well known fact that conclusion of trial takes time and every time accused has to appear before the trial court. If a person is ultimately acquitted for having found innocent, it does not cause loss to the complainant whereas alleged accused suffers a lot during pendency of trial", the Bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal held.  

The petitioner through the instant petition was seeking setting aside of the order whereby the trial court has dismissed application of the petitioner under Section 319 Cr.P.C. seeking summoning of respondents as additional accused.

The petitioner lodged an FIR under Sections 376 and 354-A IPC alleging that she had a love affair with Manjit Kumar before her marriage and that after her marriage with another man with whom she had two sons, the said Manjit Kumar persuaded her to institute divorce petition against her husband. She further alleged that on the false pretext of marrying her, he established physical relationship with him and she in fact pledged her house secretly without informing her husband, in order to support his business. 

Based on the statement of the prosecutrix, the prosecution moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. seeking summoning of private respondents. The application was dismissed. 

The petitioner's counsel argued that the allegations of the petitioner against family members of Manjit Kumar were categorical and that she was consistent in her statement before the police as well the Trial Court, however, the lower court dismissed it in a mechanical and arbitrary manner.

From the perusal of findings recorded by trial Court, the Court observed that the petitioner was trying to implicate Manjit Kumar's family members and that at the time of commission of alleged, the offence was duly married and having two children.

"It appears that despite being married and mother of two children, the petitioner wanted to marry Manjit Kumar and on account of non-performance of marriage by Manjit Kumar with petitioner, she has developed grudge against Manjit Kumar's family members who have been found innocent by the police authorities", the Bench added. 

The Court further observed that the power to summon anyone cannot be exercised mechanically.

"Criminal law cannot be put into motion at the whims and caprice of anyone. It causes mental and physical agony to a proposed accused", the Court asserted while also expounding, 

"It is well known fact that conclusion of trial takes time and every time accused has to appear before the trial court. If a person is ultimately acquitted for having found innocent, it does not cause loss to the complainant whereas alleged accused suffers a lot during pendency of trial."

In the present case, the Court held that the findings recorded by trial Court were neither factually nor legally wrong warranting interference of this Court.