CRM No. M 6957 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 6957 of 2010 Date of decision: 11.08.2010 Jaspal Singh ........ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Mandhir Singh Virk, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for entrustment of the investigation qua FIR No. 50 dated 02.02.2010 under Sections 302, 506, 427, 148, 149, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Sections 25, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Maqsudan, District Jalandhar to some independent agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation as no fair, impartial and unbiased investigation is expected from the local police. Notice of motion was issued. Reply by way of affidavit of Shri Balbir Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kartarpur, Jalandhar CRM No. M 6957 of 2010 2 (Rural) on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5 has been filed. In para 3 of the preliminary submissions of the aforesaid reply, it is stated that the enquiry in the aforesaid FIR has been completed by the Investigating Agency and was submitted to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar (Rural) for orders. After approval from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar (Rural), accused Sukhbir Singh alias Sukha was arrested on 22.03.2010, whereas, Karamjit Singh alias Bobby was declared as proclaimed offender on 06.03.2010 and the challan was likely to be presented in the Court. However, today, Mr. K S Pannu, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from HC-Manjeet Singh, Police Station Maqsudan, Jalandhar, states that the challan has already been presented in the Court against accused Sukhbir Singh and Karamjit Singh, whereas, Balraj Singh and Gurpreet Singh were found innocent during enquiry. Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under:- “319 Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence. (1) Where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which Such person could be tried together with the accused, the court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed. (2) Where such person is not attending the court he may be arrested or Summoned, as the circumstances of' the case may require, for the purpose aforesaid. (3) Any person attending the court although not trader arrest or upon a summon, may be detained by such court for the purpose of the inquiry into, or trial of, the offence which he appears to have committed. CRM No. M 6957 of 2010 3 (4) Where the court proceeds against any person under subsection (1) then- (a) The proceedings in respect of such person shall be commenced afresh, and witnesses re-heard. (b) Subject to the provisions of clause (a), the case may proceed as if such person had been an accused person when the court took cognizance of the offence upon which the inquiry or trial was commenced.” Thus, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. can always be moved in case there is sufficient and convincing evidence against any other accused. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with direction that, in case, any further evidence is led qua the other accused and the same is otherwise sufficient, action will be duly initiated in accordance with law. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge August 11, 2010 mohan