In CRR-614 of 2023-PUNJ HC- Criminal law can't be put into motion at whims & caprice of anyone as it causes mental as well as physical agony to proposed accused: P&H HC
Justice Jagmohan Bansal [16-03-2023]

Read Order: ASHA VS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

Mansimran Kaur

Chandigarh, March 17, 2023: While dismissing a revision petition challenging an order rejecting the application of the petitioner under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning respondents as additional accused, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that if a person is ultimately acquitted for having been found innocent, it does not cause loss to the complainant whereas the alleged accused suffers a lot during pendency of trial. 

A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal opined that the findings recorded by the Trial Court were  neither factually nor legally wrong and hence warranted no  interference.

The brief facts of the case were such that the prosecutrix lodged an FIR against four persons namely Bajrang, Naveen, Kuldeep and Nishu @ Sonu. The police conducted the investigation and thereafter filed its report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The police during the course of investigation did not find any substance in the allegations of the prosecutrix qua Kuldeep and Nishu @ Sonu. 

On the basis of the police report, the trial court framed charges against Bajrang and Naveen. The statement of prosecutrix came to be recorded before trial court wherein she made allegations against respondents second and third. 

On the basis of the statement of prosecutrix, the public prosecutor moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. seeking summoning of respondents second and third as additional accused. The application of the prosecutrix through public prosecutor came up for consideration before Additional Sessions Judge, however through the impugned order dated October 20, 2022 application  was dismissed. 

 Counsel for the petitioner inter alia contended that there were specific allegations against the respondents  still the trial court  mechanically dismissed application of the petitioner. The police did  not carry out investigation in a free and fair manner and respondents were wrongly exonerated.

After considering the submissions from both the sides, the Court reproduced the relevant paragraphs of the impugned order. In view of the same, the Court noted, “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”. 

In furtherance of the same, the Court noted that it is a well known fact that the conclusion of a trial takes time and every time an accused has to appear before the trial court. If a person is ultimately acquitted for having been found innocent, it does not cause loss to the complainant whereas the alleged accused suffers a lot during pendency of trial. Thus, it would be unfair and unjustified to summon the respondents who did not even remotely seem to be connected with the alleged offence, the Court further remarked. 

In the present case, the findings recorded by the trial Court were neither factually nor legally wrong and thus warranted any interference of this Court. 

Hence, in view of the observations stated above, the revision petition was accordingly dismissed.