Cr.Misc. M 23782 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 23782 of 2010 Date of decision:19.7.2010 Om Parkash and others Petitioner vs. State of Haryana. Respondent Present: Mr. Naveen Bhardwaj, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. Respondent No.2 had filed a complaint against the petitioners alleging assault by the petitioners. After appreciating the preliminary evidence, on the basis of the contradiction in the oral and medical evidence and for the reasons, mentioned in the order dated 5.11.2009, the learned SDJM, Loharu had dismissed the complaint by not summoning the petitioners as accused in exercise of powers u/s 203 Cr.P.C. On a revision, filed by respondent No.2 the revisional court had passed the following order 5.7.2010:- “ For the foregoing reasons recorded by me in the light of the cumulative effect of the circumstances of case, the revision petition stands allowed and the order, passed by the learned trial Magistrate being erroneous on law and facts of the case stands set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned trial court to determine the matter afresh in the light of the above observations.” The respondent was required to appear before the trial Magistrate on 15.7.2010 for determination of the matter afresh. Vide order Cr.Misc. M 23782 of 2010 2 dated 15.7.2010 (Annexure P-5) the learned SDJM, Loharu immediately on receipt of the file summoned all the accused to face trial for offence u/s 147/323/325/452/506/120-B IPC. The petitioners have challenged the summoning order inter alia on the ground that the revisional court had not issued any notice to the petitioners and that the summoning order, passed by the SDJM, is a non speaking order. I have considered the contentions of the counsel for the petitioners and also taken into consideration the summoning order dated 15.7.2010. The summoning order has been passed without even touching the preliminary evidence and without application of judicious mind on the material, which was available on the complaint. The learned Magistrate was not directed by the revisional court simply to summon the petitioners but was directed to determine the matter afresh in the light of the observations made in the order dated 5.7.2010. The spirit of the order, passed by the revisional court is that the trial Magistrate is required to determine prima facie whether on the basis of the allegations, made in the complaint and the preliminary evidence produced, it was a case either to issue process as per the provisions of Section 204 Cr.P.C. or to dismiss the complaint u/s 203 Cr.P.C. It is also open to the trial Magistrate, if it thinks fit, to direct investigation by the police officer or by any other person as per the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. Any of the above three modes was required to be adopted while passing a speaking order. Order dated 15.7.2010, passed by the SDJM, Loharu is apparently a non speaking order without application of judicious mind on the facts and circumstances and the material available before the trial Magistrate. The order dated 15.7.2010 is not in consonance with the order passed by the revisional court but is rather an order passed in hurry without application of judicious mind. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed and interim Cr.Misc. M 23782 of 2010 3 order dated 15.7.2010 is hereby set aside without expression of any opinion on the merits with a specific direction to the learned SDJM, Loharu to apply the judicious mind and to determine whether it is a fit case, on the basis of the material available, to issue process against all the accused. The learned SDJM, Loharu will pass a fresh order, in accordance with law, on 25.8.2010 or on any other day, to be fixed by the said court. This order will not be considered, in any manner, prejudicial to the rights of the petitioners or the complainant. August 19 ,2010 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE