Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Sh. Bahadur Singh S/O Sh. Chhote Lal vs State on 17 April, 2015

 IN THE COURT OF PRAVEEN KUMAR, P.C. ACT, SPECIAL 
                         JUDGE­3, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.


Crl. (R) No. 18/15.
PS North Rohini



In the matter of :
    1. Sh. Bahadur Singh S/o Sh. Chhote Lal
    2. Sh. Deepak S/o Sh. Dhanraj
    3. Sh. Sandeep S/o Sh. Ram Kishan
    4. Sh. Pradeep S/o Sh. Ram Kishan
    5. Sh. Sahil S/o Sh. Bahadur Singh
    6. Sh. Montey S/o Sh. Bahadur Singh
       All R/o Village Naharpur, Sector­7,
       Rohini, Delhi­110085                             ........Petitioners
                                    Vs.
       State
       (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
       Service to be effected through
       Public Prosecutor
       Rohini Courts
       Delhi                                         .......Respondent

Revision received on assignment on : 08.04.2015
Date of hearing arguments               : 17.04.2015
Date of order                             : 17.04.2015




Crl. (R) No. 18/15                                                                         Page No.1 of 4
Bahadur Singh & Ors Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
 ORDER (Oral):

1. This is a revision petition against order dated 02.09.2014 passed by Ld. MM­III (North­West), Rohini, Delhi whereby application u/s 319 CrPC filed on behalf of the State to implead and summon the petitioners herein as accused in case FIR no. 111/13 PS North Rohini, Delhi was allowed.

2. Briefly stating, the facts relevant for the disposal of the present revision petition are that complainant Pyare Lal made a complaint against Dhanraj, Ram Kishan, Karamvir and Pawan Kumar for the offences u/s 323/341/506/34 of IPC. It is alleged that the above said accused persons were abusing and beating the complainant and his family members. On this complaint of the complainant, FIR was registered and above said accused persons were charge sheeted.

3. After the charge sheet was filed against the above said four accused persons, notice u/s 251 CrPC was served to them and the complainant was examined in the court on 02.09.2014. After the part examination of PW1, an application u/s 319 CrPC was moved by the State which was allowed by Ld. MM. The relevant portion Crl. (R) No. 18/15 Page No.2 of 4 Bahadur Singh & Ors Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) of the order is re­produced herein below for convenience.

"One application u/s 319 CrPC is filed by Ld. APP for the State. Evidence is perused.

In view of the evidence of PW­1, accused persons as mentioned in application namely Anup Singh S/o Chote Lal, Deepak S/o Dhanraj, Sandeep S/o Ramkishan, Pradeep S/o Ramkishan, Sahil S/o Anup Singh and Montey S/o Anup Singh be summoned as accused for the next date of hearing." (emphasis supplied)

4. I have heard petitioner no. 1 Bahadur Singh and Sh. A B Asthana, Ld. APP for the State.

5. Petitioner has contended that petitioners were not at all present at the time of alleged incident and they have been falsely implicated by the complainant by mentioning their names in the statement before the court. He has further contended that all the family members have been falsely implicated in this case in order to harass and pressurize them. On the other hand, Ld. APP for the State has contended that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the trial court.

6. I have gone through the Trial Court Record.

7. From the impugned order itself it is clear that while summoning the Crl. (R) No. 18/15 Page No.3 of 4 Bahadur Singh & Ors Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) petitioners as additional accused in this case only the evidence was perused. Ld. MM has passed the impugned order in a mechanical and casual manner without appreciating the facts and circumstances of this case. Ld. MM should have gone through the entire material on record before deciding the application u/s 319 CrPC filed on behalf of the State. Impugned order is cryptic and no reasons have been given for summoning the petitioners as additional accused. Petitioner herein have been summoned on on the basis of evidence of PW1.

8. In these circumstances and for the above said reasons, the impugned order is set aside. Ld. MM is directed to pass a speaking order on the application u/s 319 CrPC afresh after going through the material on record. Revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. Copy of the order be sent to the trial court. Revision file be consigned to record room.

Dictated & announced in                         (PRAVEEN KUMAR)
open court today i.e on 17.04.2015              Special Judge/P.C. Act,
                                               CBI­3, Rohini Courts, Delhi.




Crl. (R) No. 18/15                                                                         Page No.4 of 4

Bahadur Singh & Ors Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)