Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Salwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 23 April, 2013

Author: Sabina

Bench: Sabina

CRM No.M-22049 of 2012 (O&M)                                              -1-


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(246)

                                   CRM No.M-22049 of 2012 (O&M)
                                   Date of decision: 23.04.2013.

Salwinder Singh
                                                       ......Petitioner

                        Versus


State of Punjab and another

                                                     .......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:          Mr. A.P.S. Sandhu, Advocate
                  for the petitioner.

                  Mr. Deep Singh, AAG, Punjab.

                       ****
SABINA, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C.') challenging the order dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-3).

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner had surrendered before the Trial Court on 11.02.2009 and had faced the trial. Petitioner was acquitted by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 19.04.2012. Hence, the impugned order was liable to be set aside. In similar circumstances, Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-8341 of 2009 was allowed by this Court vide order dated 20.04.2009 (Annexure P-5).

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the petition.

Petitioner was facing trial in FIR No.163 dated 08.05.2005 under Section 307, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 registered at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar. Petitioner absented during trial. The Trial Judge, vide impugned order dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-3), set aside the mutation No.8871 sanctioned in favour of the son of the petitioner with regard to 46 Kanals and 15 Marlas of land, initially owned by the petitioner at village Muradpura.

The Trial Judge had also set aside mutation No.18764 vide order dated 11.02.2009 sanctioned in favour of the son of the petitioner. Initially, petitioner was owner of the said property. Aggrieved against the said order dated 11.02.2009 (Annexure P-5), petitioner had approached this Court vide Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-8341 of 2009. The said petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 20.04.2009 (Annexure P-5).

Thus, the petitioner had surrendered before the Trial Court after the order dated 11.02.2009 (Annexure P-4) was passed. Thereafter, petitioner has faced the trial and has since been acquitted by the Trial Court. The object of Section 84, Cr.P.C. is to secure the presence of an accused. Since the petitioner had surrendered before the Trial Court and had faced the trial, the land of the petitioner could not be attached. Further, the mutation sanctioned in favour of the son of the petitioner could also not be set aside in these proceedings. The son of the petitioner was not even heard before passing the impugned order.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 12.11.2008 (Annexure P-

3) is set aside.

(SABINA) JUDGE April 23, 2013 sandeep sethi