IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. 17759-M of 2004 DATE OF DECISION : 28.05.2008 Chiman Lal .... PETITIONER Versus State of Punjab and another ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Sameer Sachdev, Advocate, for respondent No.2. * * * KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (Oral) Shri Vikram Chaudhary contends that the learned trial court, while exercising jurisdiction under section 321 Cr.P.C., has not to discharge adjudicatory function, but only supervisory function is to be discharged, whether the Public Prosecutor has applied his own independent view or not. The learned trial court has only to see to the limited extent that opinion of the Public Prosecutor is not subject to any influence by any authority in power. Once the trial court finds that opinion of the Public Prosecutor is independent and his own view, then the Court shall not go into the merit of the case. To fortify this contention, Shri Vikram Chaudhary has relied upon Sheo Nandan Paswan versus State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC 877. Crl. Misc. No. 17759-M of 2004 -2- The present matter is remitted back to the Court of Special Judge, Muktsar to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the ratio of judgment in Sheo Nandan Paswan's case (supra) and other recent judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court. Petition is disposed of accordingly. May 28, 2008 (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) ndj JUDGE