Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 123 (PNJ)

Parveen Bhatti v. H. C. Samuel Dass

2001-01-23

V.M.JAIN

body2001
JUDGMENT V.M. Jain, J. - This is a petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code filed by the complainant petitioner challenging the order dated 6.12.1999 passed by the JMIC, dismissing the applications of the petitioner under Section 311 Criminal Procedure Code, dated 31.8.1999 and 4.11.1999 respectively. 2. The complainant-petitioner had filed a criminal complaint against the accused-respondents under Section 494 Indian Penal Code. After the summoning of the accused-respondents the case was at the stage of pre-charge evidence. At that stage, the complainant-petitioner moved application under Section 311 Criminal Procedure Code dated 31.8.1999 for summoning the enquiry file with regard to the enquiry conducted by Narindarpal Sharma, DSP. Another application dated 4.11.1999 was also filed for summoning the record of Saint Fancis High School, Amritsar, by way of additional evidence. After hearing both sides, the learned Magistrate dismissed the applications filed by the complainant-petitioner, vide order dated 6.12.1999. Aggrieved against the said order, the complainant has filed the present petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code in this Court. Notice of motion was issued to accused-respondents. As per the office report, service was complete. However, no one has appeared on behalf of the respondents. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record carefully. 4. The application dated 31.8.1999, under Section 311 Criminal Procedure Code, was dismissed by the learned Magistrate on the ground that inquiry file had already been brought by CW-4 Shiv Kumar, Clerk of the office of SSP and no case was made out for summoning the file once again. The second application dated 4.11.1999 was dismissed on the ground that Smt. Sheela accused-respondent had already admitted about the termination order dated 7.3.1999. 5. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and after pursing the record, in my opinion, the present petition must succeed and the order dated 6.12.1999 passed by the JMIC must be set aside. 6. As referred to above the case was still at the stage of pre-charge evidence. Undoubtedly the petitioner had already examined CW-4 Shiv Kumar, Clerk of the office of SSP, who had brought inquiry file. However, the petitioner by way of additional evidence wanted to prove from the said file that H.C. Samuel Dass and had admitted that his wife was living separately for a long time and that he had married one Sheela. Undoubtedly the petitioner had already examined CW-4 Shiv Kumar, Clerk of the office of SSP, who had brought inquiry file. However, the petitioner by way of additional evidence wanted to prove from the said file that H.C. Samuel Dass and had admitted that his wife was living separately for a long time and that he had married one Sheela. Since this part of the statement had not come on record during the examination of CW-4 Shiv Kumar, in my opinion, the petitioner could be allowed to produce additional evidence in this regard. With regard to the application dated 4.11.1999 the petitioner wanted to prove reasons for termination of Smt. Sheela from the service of the school. Mere admission that her service were terminated would not serve the purpose. In this view of the matter, in my opinion, the learned Magistrate acted illegally in dismissing both the applications of the petitioner for producing additional evidence. That being so, in my opinion, the matter requires interference by this Court, in the present petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code 7. For the reasons recorded above, the present petition is allowed. The order dated 6.12.1999 passed by the Magistrate is set aside and both the applications filed by the petitioner under Section 311 for production of additional evidence are allowed. Petitioner through her counsel is directed to appear before the trial Magistrate on 22.2.2001 for further proceedings in accordance with law. Petition allowed.