Baljit Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another
! "#
$$"%&' ( '( )
"*+ & "%,-. *(
/!$
(0(01213!
! "#
$ %! "
! ! &&&
(0(01213!
( ' ( # )
)
# *! "
"++ + ,-,.-,--!* / 0 !12!# *! ++ " 3'4/ / """ " 3,5!36'!3-6!3-3!6-5!'67!'64 / -9:-5+" - ; "
+ 18 < ='
"# + +* 2
> + "# = "Statement of Angrej Singh son of Darbara son of Suja, resident of Village Rame Wala, P.S. Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, aged about 32 years, mobile No.98555(89470. Stated that I am resident of above said address. I am Nambardar of village and also the Member Panchayat. Today on 19.05.2019, I and my father Darbara, sister Harjit w/o Mahinder and Massi Veero w/o Gulzar Singh, residents of Rame Wala by sitting in my Maruti car bearing No.PB(13(L(4711 were going to Village Peer Ahmed Khan for casting votes at booth. After casting votes, we were returning back and at about 11:00 AM, when we in our car reached at Beri Wala turn then from our opposite side towards Village Hako Wala, a cream colour Mahindra Verito car bearing No.
PB(10(DD(0525 came there, which was driving by Jaswinder Singh s/o Joginder Singh, r/о Village Rame Wala, who by parking his car ahead of my car, stopped me. Tarsem Singh s/o Satpal, r/o Village Rame Wala armed with Baseball, Satpal s/o Buta empty handed, Vijay s/o Fakir armed with Baseball, residents of Village Rame Wala alighted from said car and encircled my car. In the meanwhile, one another car Mahindra Logan bearing No.PB(05( AA(5427, which was driving by Baljit Singh s/o Mahinder Singh, r/o Village Rame Wala came behind their car and Gurdev Singh s/o Mahinder Singh, r/o Village Rame Wala armed with Kirpan and 03 unknown persons armed with Kirpan and Baseball hurriedly alighted from the car.
Baljit Singh s/o Mahinder Singh raised lalkara to caught hold today, Angrej Nambardar and teach him lesson for lodging FIRs against Satpal and Tarsem etc.
'
window of car. Due to which, I was fortunately saved. Then Vijay s/o Fakir and Tarsem s/o Satpal opened the window of car and dragged me out of the car. Gurdev Singh gave two continuous Kirpan blows on me, which hit on my right thigh and Tarsem gave Baseball blow on me, which hit on my right thigh. Jaswinder Singh brought Kirpan from his car and hit on dashboard and window of my car, due to which heavy loss caused to my car. Baljit Singh brought pistol from his car. I and my father Darbara, Massi Veero and sister Harjit raised alarm 'Marta Marta'. In the meanwhile, Jasmel Singh s/o Lal Chand and Akash s/o Jaimal Singh came at the spot and they got me rescued from the clutches of said persons and said persons fled away from the spot alongwith their respective weapons by leaving one car there.
Then after arranging vehicle, Jasmel got me admitted at Civil Hospital, Ferozepur for treatment, where doctor gave me treatment. Grudge behind the occurrence is that earlier also cases have been pending between us and Satpal etc. and Baljit Singh etc. are helping them. Hence, due to said grudge, they in connivance with each other gave me beatings and caused me injuries. Kindly initiate legal proceeding against them. Statement got recorded before you, heard it and the same is correct. Sd/( Angrej Singh.
3 ; " + * "+ !#
/='695= -,-- # " Lalkara "
"+ * "
+ !#
/='599=-,-- # *"* kirpan ##
"+ + !
/='695=-,--
+ "!
# ! + #
6 ; " + ! # 2
!"+ " + ! " "
,3,4-,'4 "" +*(+
!!0#
*!
# ! ! > 12
/='695=-,-- #
! # # + " + ?# ! " # +"" "@ !#
/='695=-,-- # " ! # !
#
/='695=-,-- # " "A'3. "-,'--,'7 +"
"" "@ !#
"! + +*# ?# ! # """ " #" " 9 ; " + (/# * ++ * + +* B='
B=-8 "!?$! 2
"+ : # <+ B=' " " #" +*! " <+ B=- 2
!
*""
#
! ?
/= '695=-,-- "% !# !
/='599=-,-- " # #
Kirpan !# "
"
?# ! * * " . C ! " + # " "! " *# """ " 5 8 " " "* 7 ( ? D+/!# " # " 3'4/ / +)
!"#$$% # = )105. Power under Section 319 Cr.PC is a discretionary and an extraordinary power. It is to be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant. It is not to be exercised because the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge is of the opinion that some other person may also be guilty of committing that offence. Only where strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court that such power should be exercised and not in a casual and cavalier manner.
106. Thus, we hold that though only a prima facie case is to be established from the evidence led before the court, not necessarily tested on the anvil of cross(examination, it requires much stronger evidence than mere probability of his complicity. The test that has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction. In the absence of such satisfaction, the court should refrain from exercising power under Section 319 CrPC. In Section
) 319 CrPC the purpose of providing if 'it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence' is clear from the words 'for which such person could be tried together with the accused. The words used are not 'for which such person could be convicted'. There is, therefore, no scope for the court acting under Section 319 CrPC to form any opinion as to the guilt of the accused."
4 ! ? D+/ + "&'(&')* +
, -
+ .
$"/
" 001
! # " 3'4/ / +# "++ "! *# + "
= ! # ! # <" < * +<" * "+
# = )21.The principles of law as regards Section 319 of the Cr.P.C may be summarised as under:
a. On a careful reading of Section 319 of the CrPC as well as the aforesaid two decisions, it becomes clear that the trial court has undoubted jurisdiction to add any person not being the accused before it to face the trial along with other accused persons, if the Court is satisfied at any stage of the proceedings on the evidence adduced that the persons who have not been arrayed as accused should face the trial. It is further evident that such person even though had initially been named in the F.I.R. as an accused, but not charge sheeted, can also be added to face the trial. b. The trial court can take such a step to add such persons as accused only on the basis of evidence adduced before it and not on the basis of materials available in the chargesheet or the case
diary, because such materials contained in the charge sheet or the case diary do not constitute evidence.
c. The power of the court under Section 319 of the CrPC is not controlled or governed by naming or not naming of the person concerned in the FIR. Nor the same is dependent upon submission of the chargesheet by the police against the person concerned. As regards the contention that the phrase 'any person not being the accused' occurred in Section 319 excludes from its operation an accused who has been released by the police under Section 169 of the Code and has been shown in column No. 2 of the charge sheet, the contention has merely to be stated to be rejected.
The said expression clearly covers any person who is not being tried already by the Court and the very purpose of enacting such a provision like Section 319(1) clearly shows that even persons who have been dropped by the police during investigation but against whom evidence showing their involvement in the offence comes before the Criminal Court are included in the said expression. d. It would not be proper for the trial court to reject the application for addition of new accused by considering records of the Investigating Officer. When the evidence of complainant is found to be worthy of acceptance then the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer hardly matters. If satisfaction of Investigating Officer is to be treated as determinative then the purpose of Section 319 would be frustrated".
', 8 "! + ; 2
+ *1" !
"" +*(+
!!0#
* * "
* " " @ ! " !# 0#
#"* Kirpan "% "+ : "?#
"* # kirpan#" +
+! " '' 8 "! + +* + "* + ""
* "+ !* ++ ""8 "!
# +!
"" # 1 ! # * " #
/='695=-,--
* # # " "A'3. -,'--,'7+"
"" " # E "* @ !# # < "" # # + ! #
/='695=-,-- 8 + + !
/='599=-,-- "### Kirpan
?# ! " + ! "" * "
* " ! " *" " " #! + "+ !# "
#*
! ++ " "?# ! B=' 2
"+ : " " #" @ #! # " * ## *++ * (/
'- 8 # " ! # + ,-,.-,--!* / 0 ! 12!! " * " +* /E * '3 C"" *
(0(06 3,,3-,-.
hitesh % : F:A F:A