CRM No. M 25196 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 25196 of 2008 Date of decision: 26.03.2010 Gurinder Singh ........ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondent (s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. K S Pannu, DAG, Punjab for the respondent State Ms Divya Godara, Advocate for respondent No. 2 -.- 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. (Oral) Complaint (P-6) was filed by respondent No. 2. Preliminary evidence was recorded. Thereafter, the JMIC vide order dated 23.04.2005 marked the aforesaid complaint to the concerned SHO, Police Station Civil Line, Amritsar for further investigation. Pursuance thereto, the concerned SHO inquired into the allegations and submitted his report dated 07.09.2007 (P-8). As per the report, the petitioner was found innocent. The said report was submitted to the Court. CRM No. M 25196 of 2008 2 From the facts, it is evident that the witnesses were examined before the matter was sent for investigation. The report was submitted after examination of the prosecution witnesses. However, admittedly, while summoning the petitioner, the report dated 07.09.2007 has not been considered. Accordingly, the summoning order dated 19.09.2007 (P-9) is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court to pass afresh order after taking into account the report dated 07.09.2007 submitted by the concerned SHO. However, any observation made here-in will have no bearing on the merits of the case. Disposed of accordingly. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge March 26, 2010 mohan