MEGH NATH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have filed the present petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order dtd. 7/2/2015 (Annexure P-6) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, whereby on an application filed by the prosecution under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have been summoned as an additional accused to face the trial in the case.

(2.) Briefly stated that the FIR No.67 dtd. 12/7/2014 under Ss. 376, 420, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Cheema, District Sangrur, was registered at the behest of complainant-Kirna Kaur. As per the FIR, the complainant who is a resident of village Bakhshiwala, Tehsil Sunam, her paternal aunt Rajwinder Kaur @ Raj Begum in connivance with the petitioners allured her(complainant) to establish physical relation with the accused. Thereafter, Manjot Singh @ Soni established relation with her and the accused including the petitioners used to blackmail her, demanded gold ornaments and cash from her from time to time on the pretext that Manjot Singh @ Soni shall take her abroad and she will have a life like a heaven. The petitioners who are parents of Manjot Singh @ Soni are fully involved in the episode. These persons in connivance with each other used to blackmail the prosecutrix and around 14-15 tolas gold and around Rs.40,000.00 to Rs.50,000.00 reached to these persons. Her parents came to know about the incident and thereafter, they have solemnized her marriage with Sidhu Khan. In the aforesaid FIR, the police after investigating the matter submitted the challan against Manjot Singh @ Soni and Rajwinder Kaur and placed the petitioners in column No.2. Thereafter, when the prosecutrix was examined in the case, she has deposed against the petitioners, necessitating the prosecution to move an application under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. so as to summon the petitioners as an additional accused. It is on this application, the trial Court vide order dtd. 7/2/2015 summoned the petitioners to face trial as an additional accused.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that trial in the case has been culminated so far as other co-accused Manjot Singh @ Soni and Rajwinder Kaur are concerned and they have been convicted vide judgment dtd. 15/6/2015. The petitioners are parents of Manjot Singh @ Soni and it is for this reason they have falsely been implicated in the case. As per FIR, the alleged incident of rape had never taken place in the house where the petitioners are residing. The summoning of accused is a serious issue and the accused should not be summoned to face trial in a mechanical manner. No material is available on record which could even remotely connected the petitioners that they had in any way connived, colluded or conspired with Manjot Singh @ Soni and Rajwinder Kaur. In fact, Rajwinder Kaur is real aunt of the complainant and the allegation if any is against Rajwinder Kaur and Manjot Singh @ Soni. The incident of rape if any is of 7/7/2014, whereas the FIR was registered on 12/7/2014. Thus, there is ordinate delay in lodging the FIR. He further states that there are major contradictions in the statement made by the complainant. Even in the statement made by the prosecutrix under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C., she has not named the petitioners and it is thereafter while appearing as PW7, she has made allegations against the petitioners. In this manner, she has improved her version as stated in the FIR as well as statement made under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. Thus, summoning of petitioners in the case as additional accused is not warranted.