This judgment dismisses an application under Section 311, Cr.P.C. seeking to summon passport records to prove the accused's date of birth. The court held the evidence was filed merely to prolong the trial and was not essential for the just decision of the case.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.Misc.No.9091 of 2012 and Crl. Misc.No. M-4260 of 2012
1
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
Crl.Misc.No.9091 of 2012 and Crl. Misc.No. M-4260 of 2012 Date of Decision:- 16.02.2012
Bhagat Ram
Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others Respondents.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI.
Present: - Mr. Arun K.Bakshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI,J.
Crl.Misc.No.9091 of 2012
Criminal Miscellaneous Application is allowed
subject to all just exceptions.
Crl. Misc.No. M-4260 of 2012
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner lodged FIR No. 17 dated 16.01.2006, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471,
IPC at Police Station City Hoshiarpur. After investigation, report
Crl.Misc.No.9091 of 2012 and Crl. Misc.No. M-4260 of 2012 2
under Section 173, Cr.P.C. was filed. Charges were framed and the case was posted for prosecution evidence. Thereafter, the statements of the accused in terms of Section 313, Cr.P.C. were recorded and the case was posted for leading defence evlidence. At that stage, an application under Section 311, Cr.P.C. dated 08.03.2011 was presented by the petitioner-complainant to summon the record of passport No. E-4259061 issued on 25.02.2003. The said application was dismissed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur vide his order dated 14.01.2012 and hence the present petition for quashing of the said order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in order to prove actual date of birth of Paramjit Singh respondent-accused.,it was necessary to summon an official from the Passport Office, Jalandhar, along with the record of passport No. E-4259061.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the material available on record.
The FIR in the present case was registered on 16.01.2006 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471, IPC. The report under Section 173,Cr.P.C. was presented and, thereafter, the charges for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC were framed on 29.05.2008. On 30.11.2011, the prosecution closed its case. Thereafter, statements of the
Crl.Misc.No.9091 of 2012 and Crl. Misc.No. M-4260 of 2012
3
accused by means of Section 313, Cr.P.C. were recorded. The application under Section 311, Cr.P.C.,moved by the petitioner at that stage appears to have been filed just to prolong the trial. No plausible reasons have been shown that the summoning of an official from the passport office for proving the age as mentioned in passport No. E-4259061 was essential for the just decision of the case. The court, while considering the application under Section 311, Cr.P.C., has not only to watch the interest of the prosecution but equally see that by allowing the application, no prejudice is caused to the accused. The main object of invoking the power vested with court by virtue of Section, 311, Cr.P.C. should be that additional evidence to be summoned is essential for the just decision of the case. No doubt, the court can summon the additional evidence at any stage prior to the pronouncement of the judgment. In this case, the proposed evidence to be led by the complainant does not appear to be essential for the just decision of the case and as such, finding no merit in this petition, the same is hereby dismissed.
(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE
16.02.2012 Anoop
Crl.Misc.No.9091 of 2012 and Crl. Misc.No. M-4260 of 2012 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court was justified in dismissing the application to summon passport records under Section 311, Cr.P.C. at this stage of the trial.
Whether the proposed evidence regarding the accused's date of birth was essential for the just decision of the case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhagat Ram
State of Punjab
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
