CRR No. 2148 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRR No. 2148 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.09.2010 Anil and others ........ Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Jangvir Singh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioners -.- 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. CRM No. 45457 of 2010 Application is allowed and date fixed in the main case is preponed to today. Accordingly, the main case is taken up for hearing today itself. Main case Brief facts of the case are that a case FIR No. 489 dated 28.08.2010 under Sections 148, 149/323, 149/325, 341/149, 385/34, 395 read with Section 397 of Indian Penal Code was registered at Police Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad on the complaint of one Jai Parkash alias Bhura son of Bhudutt, resident of Village Nariyala, PS Chhainsa. The relevant portion of the FIR with respect to the allegations against the CRR No. 2148 of 2010 (O&M) 2 petitioner is as under:- “On 25.08.2009, I was going towards my house, at Nariala Sector 2, Ballabgarh on his motor cycle bearing No. HR 29 P 6275 Marka Bajaj Discover from Anandwali Gali, Arya Nagar, Ballabgarh. At about 6.00 pm when I reached near Kashyap General Store, a motor cycle came from the front side occupied by Shiv Dutt and Om Parkash sons of Bhudutt besides Tarun son of Manohar, all residents of Nariala. Another motorcycle came occupied by Yogesh son of Kamal; and Anil son of Manohar besides Ved Parkash son of Tulli, resident of Village Nariyala. From behind, three four more motorcycles came occupied by eight ten boys who included Rinku son of Dayaram resident of Nariala, Mohit son of Mahavir and Dheeraj son of Narveer resident of Dayalpur and alaong with them 5-6 more boys whose name and addresses are not known, but can identify. All of them were armed with iron rods. They all had come with common intention. Mohit exhorted to kill me. On this Yogesh gave a rod blow on my nose, Om Parkash gave a rod blow on lift hand arm, Tarun gave rod blow on right leg and Amit gave rod blow on my face due to which my teeth broke down. Ved Parkash and Rinku alternatively gave rod blow on my left leg and Mohit gave repeated rod blows on my right leg. My both legs got broke. I fell down on the road. Then all of them started beating me with fists and blows. Ved Parkash took out Rs.30,000/-, documents and mobile phone 9313022252 from my pocket.” After investigation, challan was filed against the present petitioners. The Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide his order dated 29.04.2010, came to the conclusion that all the accused persons have CRR No. 2148 of 2010 (O&M) 3 committed offences punishable under Sections 148, 323/149, 325/149, 341/149, 385/34, 395 read with Section 397 IPC and Section 201 IPC (only against accused Mohit). Accordingly, they were charged vide order dated 30.04.2010. The present revision petition is filed against the aforesaid orders framing charge against the accused persons. While challenging the aforesaid orders, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that during investigation, accused-Ved Parkash, who is alleged to have taken Rs.30,000/-,document and mobile phone from the pocket of the complainant, has been found innocent and has not been challaned. Therefore, the entire story put forth by the prosecution turns out to be a false and concocted one as the occurrence of extortion of money/robbery has not taken place. Heard. Although, the trial Court vide order 29.04.2010 has held that no offence punishable under Section 307 IPC was made out against the petitioners, but by the same order, it was held that offences punishable under Sections 148, 323/149, 325/149, 341/149, 385/34, 395 read with Section 397 IPC and Section 201 IPC (only against accused Mohit) were prima facie made out. It is not denied that the complainant had received grievous injuries. All the accused persons had altogether inflicted injuries with various weapons on the various parts of the body of the complainant. In fact, they continued beat the complainant with fists and leg blows even after he had fallen on the ground. The petitioners, in any case, have been let off CRR No. 2148 of 2010 (O&M) 4 of the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code. Allegation of extortion of money is alleged. No doubt, no challan against Ved Parkash who is stated to have snatched the money has been filed but the same cannot absolve the rest of the accused persons as the evidence is yet to be led before the Court. Moreover, the Trial Court is always at liberty to modify the charge as per the evidence led before it and also summon the additional accused under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure even if the said accused person is found innocent by the investigation. Moreover, the witnesses in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. also reiterated the assertion made by the complainant in the FIR. Thus, there is no ground to interfere with the orders dated 29.04.2010 passed by the ASJ, Faridabad vide which a prima facie case is found against the present petitioners to proceed under Sections 148, 323/149, 325/149, 341/149, 385/34, 395 read with Section 397 IPC and Section 201 IPC (only against accused Mohit). Even otherwise, the revisional Court has limited jurisdiction. No merit. Dismissed. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge September 01,2010 mohan