Crl.Misc.No.M-51938 of 2007 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No. M-51938 of 2007 Date of Decision: 12 - 2 - 2009 Mohinder Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Ms.Tanu Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.A.S.Brar, DAG, Punjab. Mr.H.S.Gill, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Vivek Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of order dated 21.8.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Moga whereby charge against the petitioner has been framed under Section 306 IPC arising out of case FIR No.147 dated 7.7.2003 registered at Police Station City Moga. The grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is two- fold. Firstly, it is submitted that no offence under Section 306 IPC is made out. Secondly, the Investigating Agency has colluded with the complainant Crl.Misc.No.M-51938 of 2007 [2] party and has made false version in order to grab estate of the deceased on the basis of will which was executed by the deceased three weeks before his death. Therefore, it has been stated that possibility that deceased was murdered cannot be ruled out and re-investigation ought to be carried in the present case. This Court had issued notice of motion. Notice regarding stay was issued but proceedings were not stayed. It is stated that during pendency of the petition, evidence of five witnesses has been recorded. I have seen the list of witnesses which has been attached with the petition. In all 22 witnesses have been cited as per list of witnesses annexed with the present petition. Even material witnesses, namely, Gulshanjit Kaur, daughter of the deceased has been examined as PW-1, Dr.R.S.Sandhu who conducted the post-mortem has been examined as PW-2, Navdeep Kaur author of the FIR has been examined as PW-3, Inderjit Singh PW-4 and one Ranjit Singh has been examined as PW-5. Rest of the witnesses are to be examined. 13 witnesses cited are police officials/witnesses. Besides these witnesses, one Notary and one Manager of the Bank have been cited as witnesses. Therefore, except for investigation witnesses, entire material evidence has been recorded by the trial Court. Propriety demands that this Court should not interfere when trial is in progress. The argument whether the evidence recorded is truthful or not can always be raised before and appreciated by the trial Court. In case the witnesses have deposed falsely, then application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. can be moved for taking them to task. Hence, no interference is warranted. The present petition is dismissed. Crl.Misc.No.M-51938 of 2007 [3] Nothing said herein should be taken as an expression of opinion on merits of the case. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) February 12, 2008. JUDGE RC