Criminal Revision No. 625 of 1992 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 625 of 1992 Date of Decision: 04.02.2008 Jagir Singh …Petitioner Versus Amrik Singh and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: None. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) Jagir Singh complainant had filed a complaint against Amrik Singh and various other persons. In the complaint Gurdev Singh, respondent, was arrayed as accused No. 6. When Gurdev Singh was summoned, a report from Military Department was received stating that on the day of occurrence Gurdev Singh was present in the Military Office. After the report was received, Jagir Singh filed an application saying that Baldev Singh be summoned instead of Gurdev Singh as Baldev Singh was alias as Gurdev Singh. The application was accepted by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ropar. Aggrieved against the same, Baldev Singh filed a revision petition in the Court of learned Criminal Revision No. 625 of 1992 2 Sessions Judge, Ropar, which was decided vide impugned order dated 13.7.1992. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar, while accepting the revision petition, observed as under:- “....The complainant has first shown Gurdev Singh as accused in the complaint and when summons were sent and report received that Gurdev Singh was on duty on that day, then it is alleged by the complainant that Gurdev Singh is alias Baldev Singh. This shows that Jagir Singh wanted to implicate either Gurdev Singh or Baldev Singh and he was not sure which of the person was present there. It is not the version of the complaint that actually Baldev Singh accused was present and he has wrongly given his name as Gurdev Singh. But it is mentioned that Gurdev Singh @ Baldev Singh was present. From the evidence of complainant and the complaint the allegations against Gurdev Singh @ Baldev Singh are of general type and he was not having any weapon. It is alleged that he raised lalkara and gave blows. This shows that name of Gurdev Singh & Baldev Singh has been introduced being relative of Amrik Singh accused. From the evidence on record on prima facie case is made against him and there is no ground to summon him”. The present revision petition was filed in the year 1992. No stay was granted when trial against the co-accused by now ought to Criminal Revision No. 625 of 1992 3 have concluded. I find no infirmity or illegality in the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar. Hence no interference is called for and the present revision petition is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 4, 2008 “DK