Virender Singh @ Nikku v. State Of Haryana

CRR No. 4325 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRR No. 4325 of 2015 Date of decision : 02.03.2016 Virender Singh @ Niku ....Petitioner V/s The State of Haryana ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Brijender Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sushil Gautam, DAG Haryana.

RAJAN GUPTA J.

Present revision petition is directed against the order dated 06.10.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala whereby his application under section 391 Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order. According to him, document, Annexure P-4 is necessary for just decision of the case. The court below has gravely erred in rejecting the same. Thus, impugned order deserves to be setaside. Plea has been opposed by learned State counsel. Brief factual background of the case is that a complaint was lodged by Ashok Kumar to the effect that he was running a Auto spare parts shop under the name and style of Pradhan Auto Care in Shop No. 10, Palika Bazar Market, Model Town, Ambala city for the last ten years. He was also the President of Auto Rickshaw Union Regd. On 01.01.2007 at about 8.30 A.M. one of his relative AJAY KUMAR 2016.03.04 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRR No. 4325 of 2015 Ashwani Kumar opened his shop. At that time petitioner alongwith other accused forcibly entered into his shop and started throwing the articles lying in the shop. He also took away sale proceeds of his shop, accounts books alongwith various documents. He extended threats to the complainant. On this statement, FIR was registered. Investigation ensued and challan was presented against the accused before the competent court. Thereafter, trial proceeded. On the basis of material and evidence adduced before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, it convicted the petitioner under sections 147, 323, 380, 448 & 452 read with section 149 IPC and sentenced accordingly. Aggrieved, petitioner preferred appeal. At the appellate stage, petitioner moved the instant application under section 391 Cr.P.C.

for bringing on record a copy of the agreement to sell, Annexure P-4 obtained under the RTI. Appellate court dismissed the application on the ground that prayer for placing on record said document had already been rejected earlier. I find no infirmity with the order passed. No case for interference in inherent jurisdiction of this court is made out. Dismissed.

March 02, 2016 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE AJAY KUMAR 2016.03.04 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document