1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 28126-M of 2009 Date of Decision: 8.10.2009 *** Harbans Kaur & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. Sohan Singh .. Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate for the petitioners. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioners are seeking quashing of criminal complaint No.75 dated 1.8.2006, under Sections 307, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC, titled as Sohan Singh Vs. Bachittar Singh & Ors. filed by the respondent and also to the order dated 24.1.2009 whereby the petitioners have been summoned by the Judicial Magistrate Ist class, Ludhiana for commission of the aforesaid offences. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have also gone through the paper book carefully. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his arguments as to the legality of the summoning order dated 24.1.2009 and has contended that the impugned order reveals non-application of judicious mind by the learned court below and has been passed in a mechanical manner. The arguments have been scanned. The impugned order reveals that the learned Court below while reproducing the allegations of the complaint and mentioning the names of the witnesses examined by the complainant and documents proved by them, in the concluding para observed that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused for the offences under Sections 307, 323, 2 506, 148, 149 IPC and proposed to issue the process against them. However, a perusal of the impugned order reveals that nothing has been discussed therein as to what was the nature of evidence produced by the complainant to substantiate the allegations, which proves sufficient for the court below to summon the petitioners under the aforesaid provisions of Indian Penal Code. Summoning of an accused in a criminal offence is a serious matter and criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of routine. The order summoning a person as an accused must reflect that the Court has applied its mind and has examined the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence, both oral as well as documentary. The Court cannot sit as a silent spectator and has to first undertook the test of prima facie case against a person against whom the offence is complained of. In view of this, the impugned order passed by the learned court below cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted back to the court below with a direction to first withdraw the process issued against the petitioners pursuant to order dated 24.1.2009, which since has been set aside and then to pass afresh order on the point of summoning of the petitioners, without being influenced by any observation made in this order. Disposed of. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE October 8,2009 Jiten