Gurmeen Kaur Saini And ANR v. Ut Chandigarh And ANR




    
   




  



 



 





 

 

 

 
        
    
!
"#$
$#"#
%&#
'
$

 #$(#
)$
#$
*
 
#
+,

 $#
)$
%&#
'
 
-
     
$#%
'*
$


 
&
./0
'
$
 
'

"#*
& 
1)
2#$)
'
3 
-4-
#
565705-0
 

&
-.7
-./
-.4
04.

808
880
86/
../
..4
.60
.44
655
-059:

65;
'
$
 #
#*
 
<'
$
=$
 >?
#
*&
#
&
8;

$# )#$
< @
9-?

'$
#,
$#
+
"# 
'
2#$)
'

 
#
-05705-8
< @
90?
#
+,
*#
A &#*
#)#


*# $# )#$B
($+,
$

$#%
+
&*#
#
&*#"
'' 
#*)
($
#**
&2#*
& )
#)
$'"
0
:'*,
$
#+%9#
&#
3 
(#
)

$
&"*#
'
A) 
#*
#
#)$
'
*#
$
#
)$
 
'

707

&
.89
($&$
(#
'*
 
&
-6;<8?
'
$
 
'



"#*
& B
($
$
*#
#)#
$#
#
#
 
&)
)#
'
$
&#
#)#
$##
)$
#
#
$
($&$
&* 
$

$
($
(
&
#
#&&
8
#
.

$
&"*#





#**)

$
&"*#
$#
$
&"*##

#9 "#
#
$# &#
*# ,
'
;6
,#
'
#)
#

'')
'"
%#
*
#)
+*"


$
&"*##
$

 )
#*
#
'*'*
$
#*,
 
$)$
"
#*
&"

(#
#**)

$
&"*#
$#
#**
$
#&&

"

&"*#
(
 )

$
#"
*&#*,
#
(
$#%)
#
#)*
,

$
,
'
$
&"*##
#
$
(#
 )
#*
#
$
#
#&&

#*

%#*
"

)#+
$
,
'
$
&"*##

(#
'$
#**)
$#

-55.05-0
(

#"*,

1$+
)$
#
##%
($
(
1(

$
&"*##
&#"

$
$
'
)
$
&"*##B
($
$
#&&

($
 

C
$
&"*##
'
**)
$
$
#
##&1
$
&"*##
#
(**
#
$
#
(

#"*,

1$+
)$
#
##%
($
$
#

)
"**
D
#
$#'
$
*&
(#
&#** 


#**)
$#
#
$
#
"
$
&"*##
*'
$
*#&
#
#%
$
*'
'"
$
$# 
'
#&&



&"*#
#**
$
#&&

&#"
)$
#
'&+*,


$
$
'
$
&"*##
#
#&&
0
8
.

;

7
#
/
)#%
%
+#)

$
&"*##
#
#*
#))
$

$
'*


#*
#**)
$#
#&&
-
8
6
7
4
#
--

'*$,
#
%*)#
*#)#)
(# 
$
&"*##


$
&"*##
#&&
-
6
-5
#
-0
#
 
#
)#
$
$
#&&

8

&  *,
+$
$

$
(
#+#
+'
$
#
'
&$#**#
#

#&&
'
$
#+&
$
*#
#*



% 
 
#
-05705-8
< @
90?
&*#
$"
&*#"
'' 

#*
'
#9+1
%#*
$#
$
#*
#)#
$
#&&
& 
#
 

#&2#*
'
$
&9#&&
% 
D )"
#
5;5;05-7
#
$
##*
'*
+,
&"*##
#)#
$
#
D )"
'
#&2#*
(#
#*
"
+,
*#
#*

A ) $# )#$
% 
D )"
#
-85405-/
.
E#
&*
'
$

+"
$#

$
#'#
&#
$

(
'#**,
"*&# 


+"
$#
$
#
3 
-4-
#
565705-0
(#
#
&
+*#

&#
3 
-5-
#
-55.05-0

 
&
808
65;

8.
 


+"
$#
$
&
(
($
##
#)#
$
&9#&&

($
'#&
#*



&
&#

$
)#
'&

"# 

@
97

9-5


+"
$#
"#)
--
#&&
B

#)#
($"
&$#)
(
'#"
(
#&2
+,
$
#*
&
% 
D )"
#
5;5;05-7


(#
'$
+"
$#
%
$
##*
'*
+,
$
&"*##
#)#
$
#'9#
D )"
#
5;5;05-7
(#
"
+,
$

'
#*


A )
% 
D )"
#
-85405-/
$

$#%
*#&
*#&

$
D )"
#

  !

"#$

 %

  &'(

  


#)  * 
#


+"
$#
$
#+%9#
&#
3 
-4-
#
565705-0
< @
9-?
#
#**
&2#*
& )
#)
$'"&* )

 
#
-05705-8
< @
90?
#
+,
*#
A &#*
#)#

*# &*#)
$

#
&*#"
'' 
"#,
+
2#$ 

6

&#
*#
#
&*
$#

$
#,
'
2#$)
'
3 
-4-
#
565705-0
< @
9-?
#
 
#
-05705-8
< @
90?
#
+,
*#
A &#*
#)#

*# 

&*#)
$

#
&*#"
'' 
+,
+")
$#
$

$#%
#,
#(#,
'"
$
& )

$
&#
'
#*"
%
,#
#

*&,

2

+
$(


($
$#%
&#
&
'
*#(
#
(
&*#
#
&*#"
'' 


'$
+"
$#
$

&#
%
#,
+'
'
$
#&2#*
'
&9 #&&
#
#
$
#)

&#
+
#
$#
$
% &

+
*
#)#
$"
(*
+
$
#"
#
(#
*
#)#
$
#

&& )*,


#,
$#
$


"#,
+
" 
;

$#%
$#
*#
&*
'
$
#
#
$#%

$
#9+1
($
$
#+*
##&
7
>+*
$
@

+(

,$, !

-.

%

  /

0.

 

* 1
$*
#
'**(
!9

 


 


 
  



 
 
           

     


   
 
     
  





 
 

 
   
  
  

/
In RajanRai v. State of Bihar, 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 85,Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: - "...In view of the foregoing discussion, we are clearly of the view that the judgment of acquittal rendered in the trial of other four accused persons is wholly irrelevant in the appeal arising out of trial of appellant - Rajan Rai as the said judgment was not admissible under the provisions of Sections 40 to 44 of the Evidence Act. Every case has to be decided on the evidence adduced therein. Case of the four acquitted accused persons was decided on the basis of evidence led there while case of the present appellant has to 

be decided only on the basis of evidence adduced during the course of his trial..."

9.

Full Bench of Kerala High Court in the caseofT. Moosa v. SubInspector of Police, Vadakara Police Station, Ernakulam, 2006(3) RCR (Criminal), held as under: - "(vii) The judgment of acquittal of co-accused in a criminal trial is not admissible under Sections 40 to 43 of the Evidence Act to bar the subsequent trial of the absconding co-accused and cannot, hence, be reckoned as a relevant document while considering the prayer to quash the proceedings under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code Such judgments will be admissible only to show as to who were the parties in the earlier proceedings or the factum of acquittal.

(viii) While considering the prayer for invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction to serve the ends of justice, it is perfectly permissible for the Court to consider the bonafides - the cleanliness of the hands of the seeker. If he is a fugitive from justice having absconded or jumped bail without sufficient reason or having waited for manipulation of hostility of witnesses, such improper conduct would certainly be a justifiable reason for the Court to refuse to invoke its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(ix) The fact that the co-accused have secured acquittal in the trial against them in the absence of absconding coaccused cannot by itself be reckoned as a relevant circumstance while considering invocation of the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure..."
-5

 )
$
'#&
'
$
&#

%(
'
$
#+%9#
*)#*



'
#,
"

$
*#
'
$


#*
'
$

(*
))
$#
$

(
&'&#**,
#"
$
#
%


&'&
*
$#
#*
+
#+

$"
&  *,
$

(
#+#
+'
$
'*)
'
$
&$#**#

##
$#
$,
(#
'
$
#*
'
$
&9#&&

+
%
#


*,
#'
$
#)
'
$
D )"
#
5;5;05-7
+,
$

'
A &#*
#)#

*# $# )#$
#
$
D )"
#
-85405-/
#
+,
$
#*

A )

$

$#%
'*
$
#

1)
2#$)
'

-4-
#
565705-0
< @
9-?
#
#**
&2#*
& )
&* )
 
#
-05705-8
< @
90?
#
+,
*#
A &#*
#)#

*#
&*#)
$"
$
&*#"
'' B

$
+#
'
#&2#*
'
$
&9#&&
($
(
)%
+'
'
+
+,
#*
&
$

(
#(#
'
$
 &,
'
#'#
& )
#)#
$"
#
$,
#**,
#,
#(#,
$
$

$#%
$(
&"*
)#
'
&
'
*#(
--
$
*#&

#"
'
&
(
< @
97

9-5?


$*
$

*
<F90?

$
#"
< @
97?
#
#
 
!9

!"  
 


  
  

 ! 
#*
'
#+%
@#&
#"
(*
$(
$#
$
#"
'

#&&
($
'#&
#*
#

&#
#1
#,
+'
$'
3$
$
&#
'
$

$#**
+
& 

$
+#
'
% &

+
*
)
#*
#)#
$"
-0
 
$
#'9#
&&"#&

&#
'
2#$)
'
$
3 
#
+2
& )
&* )
 
#
-05705-8
< @
90?

"# 

$



"
+)
+'
'
#,
" 

13.

All pending application/s, if any, shall stand closed. May 30th, 2023 (HARSH BUNGER) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No