IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc.44550-M of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 28, 2008 RANVIR BHATIA ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. SS Majithia, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. KS Sidhu, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of two petitions viz. CRM 44550-M of 2007 (Ranvir Bhatia v. State of Punjab and another) and CRM 45279-M of 2007 (Dr. Rajinder Kumar Soni and another v. The State of Punjab and another). This petition (CRM 44550-M of 2007) under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks quashing of FIR No.283 dated 21.11.2003 under Sections 406, 498-A, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Division No.2, Ludhiana (Annexure P-7) and summoning order dated 29.3.2006 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana. The prayer is also for setting aside order dated 9.7.2007 (Annexure P-9), passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Vide Criminal Misc.44550-M of 2007 2 order dated 29.3.2006 (Annexure P-8), the petitioner has been summoned to stand trial while exercising jurisdiction under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure. The revision petition carried by the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 9.7.2007 (Annexure P-9). The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that without allowing cross-examination of PW-1 Hem Lata, the petitioner and others have been summoned to stand trial. PW-1 Hem Lata had merely repeated the FIR version, which after investigation, had been found to be false. In this view of the matter, while taking notice of the same averments, the order of summoning could not have been passed. The Court is required to record its satisfaction that there are chances of conviction of the persons sought to be summoned. It has been repeatedly held that the jurisdiction under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, should be exercised sparingly. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 states that the petitioner be given liberty to cross-examine the witness and, thereafter, the complainant-respondent No.2 would file an application under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, or when other witnesses are examined and material is placed before the court for consideration, for summoning the additional accused to stand trial. There is no occasion to quash the FIR, considering the stage of the trial. However, having regard to the stand taken by the learned counsel for respondent No.2, this petition is partly allowed and orders (Annexures P-8 and P-9) are set aside. It is made clear that respondent No.2 would have the liberty Criminal Misc.44550-M of 2007 3 to file an application under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, as and when material is placed before the Court indicating culpability of the petitioner or any other person required to be summoned for standing trial. August 28, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE