Petitioner sought direction to investigate an FIR alleging murder. The court held that since the trial court had already heard a Section 319 Cr.P.C. application for summoning additional accused, no ground for High Court interference existed.
Impugned petition for direction to investigate the FIR was dismissed.
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.
KAPIL 2015.08.26 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
[1]
CRM-M-14309-2014
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
CRM-M-14309-2014 Date of Decision: 24.08.2015
Gursharan Singh
........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
.......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. A.S. Sidhu,AAG, Punjab.
*****
SABINA, J.
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.' in short) for direction to the officials respondents to investigate the FIR No.118, dated 29.11.2013, under Sections 302, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot.
Heard.
During the course of argument, it has transpired that after completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented against Dilraj Singh @ Lali and Manpreet Kaur. During the pendency of the trial,
KAPIL 2015.08.26 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
[2]
CRM-M-14309-2014
prosecution moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning respondents No.6 to 8 as additional accused. The said application was partly allowed and the Court ordered that respondent No.6, Kala Singh @ Kali, be summoned to face the trial as additional accused. So far as respondent No.7 and 8 are concerned, qua them the application was dismissed.
Since the petitioner has already taken recourse to law by moving an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. before the trial Court, at this stage, no ground for further interference by this court is made out.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
August 24, 2015 kapil
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can exercise inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct investigation after the trial court has already entertained an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Gursharan Singh
State of Punjab
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
