CRM-M-24185 v. STATE OF HARYANA

Judgment

1. Application is allowed, as prayed for. Application is allowed, as prayed for. Application is allowed, as prayed for. CRM-M-24185- -2026

1. The instant petition has been filed by The instant petition under Section has been filed by the petitioners under Section 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, quashing of order dated 12.03.2026 passed by the Court of Learned Judicial quashing of order dated 12.03.2026 passed by the Court of Learned Judicial quashing of order dated 12.03.2026 passed by the Court of Learned Judicial quashing of order dated 12.03.2026 passed by the Court of Learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Kaithal in case arising out of FIR No.145 dated Magistrate First Class, Kaithal in case arising out of FIR No.145 dated Magistrate First Class, Kaithal in case arising out of FIR No.145 dated Magistrate First Class, Kaithal in case arising out of FIR No.145 dated

26.03.2018 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 506 of IPC at Police 26.03.2018 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 506 of IPC at Police 26.03.2018 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 506 of IPC at Police 26.03.2018 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 506 of IPC at Police tion Pundri, District Kaithal whereby Station Pundri, District Kaithal whereby tion Pundri, District Kaithal whereby tion Pundri, District Kaithal whereby the application filed by the application filed by the application filed by the application filed by prosecution/complainant for summoning the present petitioners as additional prosecution/complainant for summoning the present petitioners as additional prosecution/complainant for summoning the present petitioners as additional prosecution/complainant for summoning the present petitioners as additional accused had been allowed as well as order dated 01.04.2026 passed by the Court accused had been allowed as well as order dated 01.04.2026 passed by the Court accused had been allowed as well as order dated 01.04.2026 passed by the Court accused had been allowed as well as order dated 01.04.2026 passed by the Court CRM-M-24185- -2026 (O&M) 2 ge, Kaithal in CRR No.1640 of 2026, of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal in CRR No.1640 of 2026, ge, Kaithal in CRR No.1640 of 2026, of Learned Additional Sessions Jud whereby the revision petition filed against the order dated 12.03.2026 had been revision petition filed against the order dated 12.03.2026 had been petition filed against the order dated 12.03.2026 had been dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this Brief facts of the case relevant for the purpose of disposal of this al alongwith his family petition are that on 25.03.2018, the complainant Vijay Pal alongwith his family petition are that on 25.03.2018, the complainant Vijay P petition are that on 25.03.2018, the complainant Vijay P members had gone to his agricultural land. While on the way back to home at members had gone to his agricultural land. While on the way back to home at members had gone to his agricultural land. While on the way back to home at members had gone to his agricultural land. While on the way back to home at - about 04:00 PM, he was intercepted by the present petitioners and the co- about 04:00 PM, he was intercepted by the present petitioners and the co about 04:00 PM, he was intercepted by the present petitioners and the co accused already arraigned, who were found sitting on both sides of the road. accused already arraigned, who were found sitting on both sides of the road. accused already arraigned, who were found sitting on both sides of the road. accused already arraigned, who were found sitting on both sides of the road. he crossed through them, they proclaimed that they would kill him, if he When he crossed through them, they proclaimed that they would kill him, if he he crossed through them, they proclaimed that they would kill him, if he he crossed through them, they proclaimed that they would kill him, if he did not withdraw the case filed against them in Kaithal Court. On hearing so did not withdraw the case filed against them in Kaithal Court. On hearing so did not withdraw the case filed against them in Kaithal Court. On hearing so did not withdraw the case filed against them in Kaithal Court. On hearing so and apprehending danger, the complainant tried to flee by running from the spot and apprehending danger, the complainant tried to flee by running from the spot and apprehending danger, the complainant tried to flee by running from the spot and apprehending danger, the complainant tried to flee by running from the spot the assailants from all the sides. The petitioner No.1 but he was encircled by the assailants from all the sides. The petitioner No.1 the assailants from all the sides. The petitioner No.1 but he was encircled by opened an assault upon him by striking a blow with axe which hit his finger. opened an assault upon him by striking a blow with axe which hit his finger. opened an assault upon him by striking a blow with axe which hit his finger. opened an assault upon him by striking a blow with axe which hit his finger. The petitioner No.2 struck blow with iron rod on his left leg, whereas petitioner The petitioner No.2 struck blow with iron rod on his left leg, whereas petitioner The petitioner No.2 struck blow with iron rod on his left leg, whereas petitioner The petitioner No.2 struck blow with iron rod on his left leg, whereas petitioner arm. The petitioners No.4 and 5 had No.3 gave blows with stick on his right arm. The petitioners No.4 and 5 had arm. The petitioners No.4 and 5 had No.3 gave blows with stick on his right accused already arraigned had also caused kicked and punched him. The co-accused already arraigned had also caused accused already arraigned had also caused kicked and punched him. The co injuries. He raised alarm and was rescued by his family members, who reached injuries. He raised alarm and was rescued by his family members, who reached injuries. He raised alarm and was rescued by his family members, who reached injuries. He raised alarm and was rescued by his family members, who reached cused had at the spot. While leaving the spot, the petitioners and the co-accused had at the spot. While leaving the spot, the petitioners and the co at the spot. While leaving the spot, the petitioners and the co extended threats to kill him. extended threats to kill him.

3. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. After registration of FIR, investigation proceedings were initiated. The present petitioners were found to be innocent and had not been arrested and The present petitioners were found to be innocent and had not been arrested and The present petitioners were found to be innocent and had not been arrested and The present petitioners were found to be innocent and had not been arrested and er Singh and . Challan was only presented against accused Mahender Singh and . Challan was only presented against accused Mahend challaned. Challan was only presented against accused Mahend Rakesh. CRM-M-24185- -2026 (O&M) 3

4. After recording of testimony of the complainant, prosecution filed After recording of testimony of the complainant, prosecution filed After recording of testimony of the complainant, prosecution filed After recording of testimony of the complainant, prosecution filed an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the Learned an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the Learned an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the Learned an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the Learned Trial Magistrate vide order dated 12.03.2026 as already mentioned and the Trial Magistrate vide order dated 12.03.2026 as already mentioned and the Trial Magistrate vide order dated 12.03.2026 as already mentioned and the Trial Magistrate vide order dated 12.03.2026 as already mentioned and the tion filed against that order has also been dismissed. revision petition filed against that order has also been dismissed. tion filed against that order has also been dismissed.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law as while passing the same orders are not sustainable in the eyes of the Trial law as while passing the same the Trial e fact that a thorough Magistrate and the Revisional Court ignored the fact that a thorough Magistrate and the Revisional Court ignored th Magistrate and the Revisional Court ignored th investigation had been conducted in the matter and the complicity of the investigation had been conducted in the matter and the complicity of the investigation had been conducted in the matter and the complicity of the investigation had been conducted in the matter and the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of subject offences had not been established at all petitioners in the commission of subject offences had not been established at all petitioners in the commission of subject offences had not been established at all petitioners in the commission of subject offences had not been established at all and that is why their names were kept in column No.2 of the challan report and and that is why their names were kept in column No.2 of the challan report and and that is why their names were kept in column No.2 of the challan report and and that is why their names were kept in column No.2 of the challan report and they had not been arrested and challaned. It is further argued that there was they had not been arrested and challaned. It is further argued that there was they had not been arrested and challaned. It is further argued that there was they had not been arrested and challaned. It is further argued that there was and 2 are Army and ample material on record to show that the petitioners No.1 and 2 are Army and ample material on record to show that the petitioner ample material on record to show that the petitioner Airforce personnel and were performing their duties at their respective places of Airforce personnel and were performing their duties at their respective places of Airforce personnel and were performing their duties at their respective places of Airforce personnel and were performing their duties at their respective places of which are far away from the place of occurrence and were not present postings which are far away from the place of occurrence and were not present which are far away from the place of occurrence and were not present which are far away from the place of occurrence and were not present the complainant at the spot at the relevant time. The fact that the testimony of the complainant at the spot at the relevant time. The fact that the testimony of at the spot at the relevant time. The fact that the testimony of was nothing but mere reiteration of the allegations in the statement recorded by mere reiteration of the allegations in the statement recorded by mere reiteration of the allegations in the statement recorded by the complainant the police previously which culminated into lodging of before the police previously which culminated into lodging of the police previously which culminated into lodging of the FIR, had also been ignored. It is argued that the testimony of the the FIR, had also been ignored. It is argued that the testimony of the the FIR, had also been ignored. It is argued that the testimony of the the FIR, had also been ignored. It is argued that the testimony of the complainant has been wrongly relied upon by the Trial Court. There was no complainant has been wrongly relied upon by the Trial Court. There was no complainant has been wrongly relied upon by the Trial Court. There was no complainant has been wrongly relied upon by the Trial Court. There was no t of the petitioners in the evidence on record to prove the involvement of the petitioners in the evidence on record to prove the involvemen prima facie evidence on record to prove the involvemen subject offences. The evidence so led on record did not raise any probability of subject offences. The evidence so led on record did not raise any probability of subject offences. The evidence so led on record did not raise any probability of subject offences. The evidence so led on record did not raise any probability of their complicity in the crime. With these broad submissions, it is urged that the their complicity in the crime. With these broad submissions, it is urged that the their complicity in the crime. With these broad submissions, it is urged that the their complicity in the crime. With these broad submissions, it is urged that the impugned order is liable to be set aside, t impugned order is lia by the ble to be set aside, the application filed by the CRM-M-24185- -2026 (O&M) 4 prosecution/complainant under Section 319 of Cr.P.C is liable to be dismissed prosecution/complainant under Section 319 of Cr.P.C is liable to be dismissed prosecution/complainant under Section 319 of Cr.P.C is liable to be dismissed prosecution/complainant under Section 319 of Cr.P.C is liable to be dismissed his argument, and further the present petition deserves to be allowed. To fortify his argument, and further the present petition deserves to be allowed. To f and further the present petition deserves to be allowed. To f learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed by this learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed by this learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed by this learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed by this Surinder Kumar V. State of Haryana (Punjab and Haryana) : Law Court in Surinder Kumar V. State of Haryana (Punjab and Haryana) : Law Surinder Kumar V. State of Haryana (Punjab and Haryana) : Law Surinder Kumar V. State of Haryana (Punjab and Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2689030 Finder Doc Id # 2689030

6. Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the Per contra, learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 has argued that there is no illegality or infirmity respondent No.2, has argued that there is no illegality or infirmity has argued that there is no illegality or infirmity by the Learned Trial Court as well as Revisional Court and in the orders passed by the Learned Trial Court as well as Revisional Court and by the Learned Trial Court as well as Revisional Court and in the orders passed hence it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. To buttress hence it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. To buttress hence it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. To buttress hence it is stressed that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. To buttress his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the in SLP (Criminal) No.1891 of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (Criminal) No.1891 of in SLP (Criminal) No.1891 of judgment passed by the 2024 decided on 06.04.2024 in case titled as 2024 decided on 06.04.2024 Harjinder Singh Vs. State of titled as Harjinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, judgment passed by this Court in Punjab and Another, 2024 judgment passed by this Court in CRR-1236-2024 Harbhajan Singh and Others Vs. State decided on 12.08.2025 in case titled as Harbhajan Singh and Others Vs. State Harbhajan Singh and Others Vs. State decided on 12.08.2025 and Another. of Punjab and Another

7. This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel This Court has heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. for the parties at considerable length.

8. Section 319 of Cr.P.C. which is pari materia Section 319 of Cr.P.C. with Section 348 of pari materia with Section 348 of BNSS, empowers th empowers the Court to add any person, not accused before it, e Court to add any person, not being the accused before it, sufficient evidence indicating his but against whom there appears during trial sufficient evidence indicating his sufficient evidence indicating his but against whom there appears during trial involvement in the offence, as an accused and direct him to be tried along with t in the offence, as an accused and direct him to be tried along with and direct him to be tried along with other accused. The principle of law with reference to exercise of jurisdiction r accused. The principle of law with reference to exercise of jurisdiction with reference to exercise of jurisdiction under this Section has been well nder this Section has been well settled by the Constitution Bench of Hon’bl e settled by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble CRM-M-24185- -2026 (O&M) 5 Supreme Court in a celebrated pronouncement cited as Supreme Court in a celebrated Hardeep Singh and pronouncement cited as Hardeep Singh and