Ram Niwas and another vs State of Haryana and another

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present revision petition u/s 397(2) read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ''Cr.P.C.'') has been filed for setting aside the order dated 23.11.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal vide which the petitioners have been summoned u/s 319 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.581 dated 13.10.2010 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 307, 302 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sadar Karnal.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal.

This Court while issuing notice of motion on 13.12.2011 passed the following order:

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners states that he will not press this petition for quashing of the summoning order but considering the fact that the petitioners were found innocent both by the Investigating Officer and by DSP (a complaint filed by the complainant and marked to DSP by the Court u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C.), the petitioners at least deserve to be granted concession of bail. On the oral request, Ram Sharan s/o of Kishan Lal, r/o Village Mangalpur, District Karnal (complainant) is impleaded as respondent No.2. Registry is directed to make necessary correction in the memo of parties.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Man Mohan Sikka, DAG, Haryana, at the asking of the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to supply copy of the petition to learned DAG, Haryana during the course of the day.

Learned counsel for the petitioners also undertakes to serve respondent No.2 through their counsel Mr. S.S. Narwal before the trial court by way of dasti process. May do so. Dasti only.

Adjourned to 20.12.2011.

In the meantime, arrest of the petitioners shall remain stayed and the trial court would adjourn the case to a date beyond that fixed by this Court.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have appeared before learned trial Court and released on bail.

This fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant.

Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 13.12.2011 passed by this Court, granting interim bail to the petitioners Ram Niwas and Sunil Kumar alias Nitu is, hereby, made absolute.

However, as per statement of the counsel for the petitioners, present revision petition for quashing summoning order stands dismissed as withdrawn.

The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.