Sukhdev Kaur vs Satpal Singh And Others on 19 February, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sukhdev Kaur vs Satpal Singh And Others on 19 February, 2024

            119                                                      2024:PHHC:020624
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                     AT CHANDIGARH
                                                              CRM-M-25023-2019 (O&M)
                                                    Date of Decision: February 14, 2024

            SUKHDEV KAUR                                                  ........Petitioner
                                 Versus
            SATPAL SINGH AND OTHERS                                      ........Respondents

            CORAM:             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

            Present:Mr. B.S. Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.
                    Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 10.
                    Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
                                         ****
            HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

By way of present petition filed under Section 482 CrPC,

prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 08.03.2019

passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Moga whereby the

application filed under section 311 of CrPC at the instance of

petitioner-complainant stands declined.

2. In the present case, FIR No.125 dated 28.08.2016 was

registered under Sections 148, 149, 452, 506, 323, 324, 427, 447 and

448 of IPC (Section 325 of IPC added later on), P.S. Dharamkot, Moga

at the instance of petitioner-complainant wherein, upon framing of

charges, the petitioner-complainant appeared as PW-1. Her

examination-in-chief was recorded on 01.12.2018 and the trial was

deferred for her cross-examination. In the meanwhile, an application

under Section 311 CrPC came to be filed at the instance of petitioner-

complainant which was opposed at the instance of private respondents

and was finally declined by the trial Court vide order dated 08.03.2019.

3. Impugning the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that certain relevant information which was required
TEJWINDER SINGH
2024.02.19 15:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
2024:PHHC:020624 -2-
CRM-M-25023-2019 (O&M)

to be brought before the Court at the instance of petitioner, including the

identity of the alleged accused which somehow could not be made in

the examination-in-chief and as such her further examination was very

much necessary for the complete and effective adjudication of the case

and thus, the trial Court committed illegality while declining the

application.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel representing the private

respondents submits that once lacuna has been left in the examination-

in-chief which goes in favour of the private respondents/accused, the

petitioner cannot be permitted to fill the same by way of her further

examination.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone

through the paper-book. I find substance in the submissions made by

learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. In the present case, in pursuance to the FIR registered on

the basis of her statement, the petitioner appeared as PW-1 and the

examination-in-chief was recorded on 01.12.2018, however,

immediately thereafter, sensing some inadequacy in her statement, an

application was filed at her instance for further examination which on

being opposed was declined by the trial Court. In the given facts, once

the application was promptly moved at the instance of the petitioner,

without losing any time, the trial Court instead of following a hyper-

technical approach should have proceeded further by having

adopted a pragmatic approach so as to add on to the cause of justice.

TEJWINDER SINGH
2024.02.19 15:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

             2024:PHHC:020624                                                         -3-
                                                                CRM-M-25023-2019 (O&M)


            It may be pointed here that the procedural aspects are merely                  to

            regulate           the proceedings and are not to be used to curtail the

substantive rights of the parties. Once an application was promptly

moved at the instance of petitioner for seeking permission to re-

examine herself and that too even before start of her cross-

examination, the same ought to have been allowed by the trial Court as

it would not cause any prejudice to the rights of the private respondents

who would always have right to cross-examine the petitioner.

7. Resultantly, the order dated 08.03.2019 passed by Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Moga is set aside and the application filed under

Section 311 CrPC at the instance of petitioner-complainant stands

allowed.

8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

            14.02.2024                                        (HARKESH MANUJA)
            Tejwinder                                              JUDGE
                                    Whether speaking/reasoned   Yes/No
                                       Whether Reportable       Yes/No




TEJWINDER SINGH
2024.02.19 15:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
 TEJWINDER SINGH
2024.02.19 15:39
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document