(Navin Sinha and B.R. Gavai, JJ.)
Harish Dahiya @ Harish and Another ________________ Appellant(s);
v.
State of Punjab and Others ________________________ Respondent(s).
Criminal Appeal No. 1614 of 2019 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4091 of 2019], decided on October 23, 2019
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants assail order dated 20.03.2019 passed by the High Court declining to interfere with the order of the Additional Sessions Judge refusing to discharge the appellants in a prosecution case under section 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there is no specific attribution to the appellants in the suicide note. The appellants are the sister-in-law of the deceased and her husband.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent – State informs that in the trial, the prosecution evidence is over and the defence evidence is virtually at closure. She further submits that there is a reference in the charge-sheet to some compromise petition also signed by the deceased the contents of which are not known at this stage.
5. Be that as it may, we find that the order dated 26.10.2018 refusing to discharge the appellants suffers from abdication of jurisdiction. Merely because an earlier application to quash the entire prosecution under section 482 of Cr.P.C. may have been dismissed, the Additional Sessions Judge could not decline to consider the application for discharge on that ground. The grounds for quashing a criminal proceeding and the reasons for allowing or disallowing an application for discharge preferred by the accused are completely different. The grounds falling for consideration in the two jurisdictions are completely different.
6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, we set aside the impugned orders and remand the discharge application to the Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur for fresh consideration and to pass a reasoned and speaking order to his satisfaction keeping all aspects of the matter in mind, including the submissions made before us on behalf of the respondent – State. The appeal is allowed.
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4091/2019
Harish Dahiya @ Harish & Anr _______________________ Petitioner(s)
v.
The State of Punjab & Ors _________________________ Respondent(s)
(With IA No. 71706/2019 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 71707/2019 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 75289/2019 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 23-10-2019 The matter was called on for hearing today.
(Before Navin Sinha and B.R. Gavai, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Adv.
Mrs. Neeraj Singh, Adv.
Mr. Firoz Saifi, Adv.
Ms. Sundri, Adv.
Ms. Shalu Sharma, AOR
For Respondent(s) Ms. Jaspreet Gogia, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
7. Leave granted.
8. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
9. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
———
