← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/4138/2015dismissed

Sandeep v. Jagan Ram

2016-04-28Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRR No.4138 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision: April 28, 2016 Sandeep

...Petitioner

Versus

Jagan Ram

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Mukesh Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate for Mr.Sanjay Mittal, Advocate for the respondent.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner Sandeep against respondent Jagan Ram, challenging the order dated 07.08.2015 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Narnaul, vide which the revision filed by the respondent against the order dated 11.12.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mohindergarh, was allowed.

Notice of motion was issued and learned counsel for the respondent appeared and contested the petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

From the record, I find that Jagan Ram complainant-

CRR No.4138 of 2015 -2respondent filed a complaint against Praveen Kumar son of Subhash son of Pokar, Smt.Savitri Devi wife of Subhash son of Pokar, Subhash son of Pokar and Sandeep son of Pokar under Sections 323, 325, 452, 506 and 34 IPC. Inadvertently, in the headnote of the complaint, Sandeep has been shown as son of Pokar instead of son of Subhash son of Pokar, for which the application was filed before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Mohindergarh, which was dismissed. Then a revision was filed by the complainant and learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Narnaul, vide order dated 07.08.2015, accepted the revision and allowed the application.

Aggrieved from the above-said order dated 07.08.2015, present revision has been filed by petitioner Sandeep. I have gone through the impugned order dated 07.08.2015 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Narnaul. The findings are correct and as per law. In no way, it can be held that any illegality has been committed. Such type of clerical mistake in a compliant can be amended. The Court has held that all the accused are members of one family as accused Praveen Kumar is son of Subhash, Smt.Savitri Devi is wife of Subhash son of Pokar, Subhash son of Pokar has also been arrayed as accused and Sandeep son of Subhash has been mentioned as son of Pokar. It is also in the order of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Narnaul that there is no other member of the family by the name of Sandeep son of Pokar. Even it is stated that there is no person named Sandeep son of Pokar in the village. Keeping in view the above discussion, I find that the order

CRR No.4138 of 2015 -3dated 07.08.2015 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Narnaul, in no way, can be held as illegal. The impugned order is correct and as per law.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present revision petition, the same is dismissed.

April 28, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE