Irshad v. State Of Haryana And ORS
!
" #
$ %!
&'()*+,-#.*,/0+&/(/#/)
!!
"
#### ,/0+&/(/#/)1&/)2 $! %&'( )!! '
* +&',"-
! "
.'/ (
$
!! "
!
" '1 % +&'1"
!"
) 2 3 "
! 4 -- 5
! " $ !"
!!
) " "
!
-
- $
0 4 ---
2
5 -
6 0-
- - 2 ) "
- !
- $
! $
-" ) "
(
" (
)
$
0 "
(
!4
7
8
9024 +&& ':
% +&'1
'%,.+..+%.%'.%+.&:*&1 '%/0("
!
$902"
! !
',"
!!
!
'' $ .'/(
)!! ;" 4 +:
$ -
! 4" '
* +&', .'/ (
< - !
!
"!
; $ "
+'
+ +&': !
-
<
- !
- !
!
< -
=
-; - )!
< " -
)! $ ! ("
0 ! !!" -
$-
<
! " - 0 - " "
!
$" - .'/( -;
$"
; ""-;
!
0
"
" -
-
-
< +'
+ +&': - -
9
- ', )
"!>- "
" - -
<
"
-
A Five-Judge Bench judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, (2014) 3 SCC 92 and thereafter other Benches of Hon'ble Supreme Court in a plethora of judgments have held that a person cannot be summoned mechanically and Court is supposed to examine the veracity of the additional evidence brought on record. There is no need of cross-examination of witnesses and trial Court can summon any person as additional accused if from the evidence either documentary or oral, it comes out
that proposed accused is part of the alleged offence. In the case in hand, the police has conducted thorough investigation and there is no allegation of bias against the police. Even otherwise, there is nothing on record to indicate that the private respondents are influential people or they had influenced the police officials. There is no additional evidence on record which could compel the trial Court to summon the private respondents under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no ground to interfere with impugned order dated 1.5.2018 passed by learned ASJ, Mewat. The petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.
1,/0+&/(/#/)2 ,- 0*