Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous not M-35686 of 2012 (O & M) Date of Decision: December 07, 2012 Islamuddin ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana & another ....RESPONDENT(S) ..CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI ..PRESENT: - Mr.Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate, for the petitioner .
.
M.M.S.Bedi, J (Oral) 1.
Petitioner seeks quashing of a complaint in a case FIR No.252 dated 26.7.2010 under Sections 323, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station, Hathin, District Palwal.”
2. As per allegations in the FIR lodged at the instance of the petitioner, Jafru (respondent No.2) alongwith his co-accused sharing common intention, had fired at the complainant with a country made pistol, injuring the petitioner- complainant on his right leg.
As main accused, Jafru, evaded Crl.
Misc.
not M-35686 of 2012 [2].appearance, his co-accused were challaned, inter-alia, under Section 307 IPC.
After commitment, charges have been framed against co-accused of Jafru.
An application for pre-arrest bail was filed by Jafru but it was dismissed.
As the prosecution agency claimed that on further investigation under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C., offence under Section 307 has been deleted, Jafru was granted regular bail observing that prosecution agency, on further investigation, had found that offence under Section 307 IPC was not made out.”
3. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.for a direction to the investigating agency to include offence under Section 307 IPC apprehending that on the basis of partial further investigation conducted under the garb of provisions of Section 173(8) Cr.P.C., offence under Section 307 IPC will be omitted while presenting the challan.”
4. Counsel for the petitioner, on the asking of the Court, informs that till date, the prosecution agency has opted not to present challan against Jafru.
Since challan has not yet been presented, omitting offence under Section 307 IPC qua Jafru, no direction in anticipation can be issued to the State, however, it is ordered that in case petitioner has got an apprehension that on the basis of fake partial investigation, Jafru is being protected by omitting to add offence under Section 307 Crl.
Misc.
not M-35686 of 2012 [3].IPC in report under Section 173 Cr.P.C.which is likely to be presented, it will be open to the petitioner to file a representation to the Superintendent of Police, Palwal, expecting that the matte would be carefully looked into.”
5. As it is not certain whether the investigation conducted without the permission of the Court under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C.has been accepted by the senior police officials, this petition is disposed of as pre-mature, at this stage, with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again on the same ground in case the prosecution agency opts to, on the basis of partial investigation, omit the inclusion of offence under Section 307 IPC at the time of presentation of challan.
(M.M.S.Bedi) December 07, 2012 Judge avin