CRR No.1035 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CRR No.1035 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.03.2011 Inderjit Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Bhavna Gupta, D.A.G., Punjab for the State. ... Alok Singh, J (Oral). Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that FIR No.173/04 was registered against the petitioner and co-accused for an offence punishable under Sections 420/467/468/471 read with Section 120- B IPC. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, neither police has filed any challan for an offence under Section 326 IPC nor any material was placed before the Magistrate, justifying the framing of charge against the petitioner for an offence under Sections 326/148/149 IPC. He further states that CRR No.1035 of 2009 2 mentioning of charge under Sections 326/148/149 IPC in the impugned order itself shows non-application of mind while framing charges. Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has very fairly conceded this fact and submitted that there was no material available before the Magistrate for framing of charge under Section 326/148/149 IPC. Perusal of the record shows that challan was submitted against the petitioner and the co-accused for an offence under Sections 420/467/468/471 read with Section 120-B IPC, however, the Magistrate has mentioned Sections 326/148/149 IPC in the impugned order, which itself shows non-application of mind while framing charges. In view of the above, present petition is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. However, the Magistrate shall be at liberty to pass fresh order, in accordance with law, after taking into consideration entire material available on the file. ( Alok Singh ) Judge 01.03.2011 sk.