Quashed

Jit Singh @ Ajit Singh and Anr. v. Gurdev Kaur

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Jul 2009CRM-M/15021/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the quashing of a criminal complaint and the summoning order under various IPC sections. The High Court held the impugned order unsustainable as it failed to discuss allegations or evidence, violating the requirement to examine prima facie case before summons.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order summoning petitioners set aside; matter remitted for fresh order after withdrawing process.

Jit Singh @ Ajit Singh and Anr. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Crl. Misc. No. 15021-M of 2009 Date of Decision: 16.7.2009

¶4

¶5

Jit Singh @ Ajit Singh & Anr.

.. Petitioners

Vs.

Gurdev Kaur

.. Respondent.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,

¶11

Present:Mr. V.K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

**Ms. Jatinder Jit Kaur, Advocate for the respondent. *****

¶13

ARVIND KUMAR, J.

¶14

The petitioners are seeking quashing of criminal complaint No.91 dated 13.8.2005, under Sections 387, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 511 IPC titled as Gurdev Kaur Vs. Ajit Singh & Ors. filed by the respondent and also to the order dated 1.4.2009 whereby the petitioners and others have been summoned by the Judicial Magistrate Ist class, Kapurthala for commission of the aforesaid offences.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the paper book carefully.

¶16

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his arguments as to the legality of the summoning order dated 1.4.2009 and has contended that the impugned order reveals non-application of judicious mind by the learned court below and has been passed in a mechanical manner. It has further been pointed out that the said allegations pertain to the year 2001 while the complaint has been filed with inordinate delay only on 13.8.2005.

¶17

The arguments have been scanned. The impugned order reads thus:

¶18

¶19

“ Heard, there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused under Sections 387/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471/ 506/ 511 IPC. Therefore accused are ordered to be summoned for 9.5.2009 .”

¶20

At the threshold this Court refrain from commenting on the merits of the case, as it may cause prejudice to any of the parties. However, a perusal of the impugned order reveals that nothing has been discussed therein as to what were the nature of allegations and evidence produced by the complainant to substantiate the same, which proves sufficient for the court below to summon the petitioners under the aforesaid provisions of Indian Penal Code. Summoning of an accused in a criminal offence is a serious matter and criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of routine. The order summoning a person as an accused must reflect that the Court has applied its mind and has examined the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence, both oral as well as documentary. The Court cannot sit as a silent spectator and has to first undertook the test of prima facie case against a person against whom the offence is complained of.

¶21

In view of this, the impugned order passed by the learned court below cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted back to the court below with a direction to first withdraw the process issued against the petitioners pursuant to order dated 1.4.2009, which since has been set aside and then to pass afresh order on the point of summoning of the petitioners, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶22

The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the Court concerned on 24.8.2009.

¶23

(ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE

¶24

July 16,2009 Jiten

Jit Singh @ Ajit Singh and Anr. v. Gurdev Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jit Singh @ Ajit Singh and Anr. v. Gurdev Kaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Ismail and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Harnek Singh Vs State of Punjab

Gurcharan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Wazir Singh Vs Jagir Singh & Others