CRR NO. 953 OF 2009(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR NO. 953 OF 2009(O&M) DECIDED ON : 03.10.2011 Gian Singh ...Petitioner versus Kajri Gupta and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. C. PURI Present : Mr. J. V. Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana. Ms. Amrita Nagpal, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. K. C. PURI, J. (ORAL) This is a revision petition against the order dated 03.02.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, vide which the application filed by the prosecution under Section 311 Cr.P.C, was partly allowed and partly declined. The revision petition has been filed by the complainant for allowing that part of the application. Briefly stated, the complainant-State filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C for summoning the prosecution witnesses Renu Sinha, Handwriting Expert-cum- Senior Scientific Officer, Govt. of Haryana, FSL, Madhuban, CRR NO. 953 OF 2009(O&M) -2- Karnal and Ram Kishan Malik, Inspector/SHO, P.S City Ballabgarh. The case is under Section 306/342/34 IPC and was pending at the stage of evidence of prosecution. Learned trial Court dismissed the application for examination of Renu Sinha, Senior Scientific Officer, Govt of Haryana, FSL, Karnal on the ground that her report is per se admissible under Section 293 Cr.P.C. Vide order dated 23.08.2011, learned State counsel was directed to file an affidavit whether the evidence given by Renu Sinha is per se admissible or not ? Affidavit of Ram Kishan, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ballabgarh has been placed on record in which it is mentioned that Renu Sinha was promoted as Senior Scientific Officer (Documents) on 14.08.2001. However, she has not been notified as Assistant Chemical Examiner or Government Scientific Officer for the purpose of Section 293 Cr.P.C, as intimated by Director, Forensic Science Laboratory Haryana, Madhuban, Karnal vide letter No.11481/FSL(H) dated 22.09.2011. In these circumstances, examination of Renu Sinha is most essential for just and proper decision of the present case. The application qua her has been dismissed only on the ground that her report is per se admissible under Section 293 Cr.P.C. The prayer has been opposed by learned counsel for the accused. CRR NO. 953 OF 2009(O&M) -3- However, I am of the considered view that the examination of expert is essential for just decision of the case. Consequently, that part of the impugned order vide which her examination has been disallowed, stands set-aside and prosecution is allowed to examine Renu Sinha, Senior Scientific Officer, Govt of Haryana, Madhuban, Karnal as witness. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. OCTOBER 03, 2011 (K. C. PURI) shalini JUDGE