Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

After registration of the above case, the investigation was carried out and during investigation, the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 336 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 Arms Act, 1959 were substituted with offences punishable under Section 304-A and 336 IPC 2 of 20 and Section 30 Arms Act, 1959.

Upon completion of investigation, the final report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C was filed on 07.03.2017 before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Talwandi Sabo, but before it could be considered, an application was moved on behalf of the Public Prosecutor for committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, as prima facie, the offence punishable under Section 304 IPC was made out. The said application was allowed by Magistrate vide order dated 03.07.2017 and the case was committed for Sessions trial.

Thereafter, on considering the final report as well as the arguments of the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda vide his order dated 15.09.2017 (Annexure P-2) framed the charges against accused/respondent No.2, namely, Lucky Kumar @ Billa for alleged commission of the offence punishable under Sections 304 and 336 IPC, whereas respondent No.3, namely, Sanjay Goyal was charged for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 30 Arms Act, 1959.

During the pendency of the case, the complainant, namely, Rajinder Singh died and mother of the victim, namely, Manjeet Kaur wife of Baldev Singh (petitioner) preferred an application dated 07.03.2018 (Annexure P-9) for alteration of charge on the ground that the material on record indicated commission of offence punishable 3 of 20 under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 Arms Act, 1959 apart from the offence under Section 336 IPC. It was pleaded in the application that though FIR was initially registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC etc., but subsequently, the police reduced the charges as noticed above. According to the mother of victim, when her daughter was performing on the stage, the accused persons insisted to climb on the stage for dancing with the orchestra girls and as they were not permitted, the accused fired the gunshot upon her and caused her death. Lastly, it was pleaded that respondent No.2- Lucky Kumar @ Billa had applied for regular bail through CRM-M-31953-2017 before this Court and the said petition was dismissed vide order dated 23.01.2018 (Annexure P-8), however, liberty was granted to the complainant to move an application for alteration of charge, but the trial Court vide impugned order dated 27.07.2018 refused to amend the charge. Hence this revision petition.

Mr. Hakam Singh, Advocate has argued that from the very beginning a specific case was set up by the complainant as well as other eye witnesses, who were present at the place of occurrence, that the accused persons were armed with weapons and insisted to dance with Kulwinder Kaur, who was performing on stage with other orchestra girls at a marriage function being held on 03.12.2016 at Aashirwad Marriage Palace, Maur Mandi Bathinda, but as they were restrained by the stage secretary, therefore, respondent No.2 fired a gun shot which hit the victim causing her death on the spot. He further argued that apart from motive, the nature of injury as well as weapon used in crime, clearly indicate commission of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. However, during the investigation, Somnath son of Parkash Chand, who is father of respondent No.2 and Vijay Goyal son of Relu Ram (father of respondent No.3) moved separate applications in January 2017 before the Superintendent of Police, Bathinda raising grievance against registration of FIR No.233 dated 04.12.2016 and claimed innocence of the accused, whereupon an enquiry was conducted and death of victim was described as accidental, and final reprot was filed under Sections 304-A, 336 IPC and Section 30 Arms Act, 1959 in order to favour the accused. According to him, the approach adopted by the trial Court while framing charges against 5 of 20 accused is extremely erroneous in law as it failed to apply its judicial mind to the facts, circumstances and material on record, and similarly the application filed by Manjeet Kaur for alteration of charge was also dismissed summarily without even considering the relevant material. He prays that the impugned order be set aside and the accused be charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 IPC and 336 IPC and Sections 25 and 30 Arms Act.

Now turning to the facts of the case in hand and upon analysis, this Court finds that as per prosecution the accused persons were attending the wedding function at Ashirvad Marriage Palace, Bhatinda on 03.12.2016, where victim along with other orchestra girls was performing dance on a stage when accused-Lucky Kumar @ Billa took licensed weapon of Sanjay Goyal (co-acused) and fired a gunshot, which hit on the head of victim, who died on spot. Though initially, the FIR was registered for offences punishable under Sections 302, 336, 148 and 149 IPC, 1860 and Section 25 and 27 Arms Act, 1959, but during the investigation, the said offences were substituted with Sections 304-A, 336 IPC and Section 30 Arms Act. The examination of final report reveals that during investigation, the police had recovered the weapon of offence from the accused and as per postmortem report Kulwinder Kaur died of gunshot injury, however, after completion of investigation, the accused were sent to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 304-A, 336 IPC and Section 30 Arms Act.