November 16, 2017:

Bench even suggested removing from the Judicial service all together.

Nearly three years after the Moga Additional District and Sessions Judge illegally sentenced two persons to life imprisonment in a murder case without putting them to trial, Punjab and Haryana HC has castigated the Additional District and Sessions Judge for passing a “patently perverse” order before recommending the disciplinary action.

While referring the matter to Chief Justice of HC, Justice Rajan Gupta stated that,“Alternatively, it may be considered whether his further retention in services is desirable".

Order had left Chand Singh and another petitioner Desa Singh in a bizarre situation, practically bereft of the legal remedy, as an appeal against the  conviction can only be filed by a convict put to trial.

Only remedy available to Petitioners, under the circumstances, was to invoke High Court’s extraordinary writ jurisdiction.

Stating the case facts as “peculiar”, Justice Gupta ordered that treating matter as a Criminal Revision Petition for preventing the petitioners from remaining remediless.

Additional Sessions Judge, in his order dated January 19, 2015, had held that the Petitioners guilty in a murder and destruction of the evidence case under the Sections 302 and Section 201 of Indian Penal Code.

Petitioners further submitted before the HC Bench that Petitioners’ name did figure in FIR registered at the Dharamkot Police Station in the Ranjit Singh’s murder case. But challan was presented only against the three accused.

An application under the Section 319 of Cr.P.C for summoning petitioners to face trial as additional accused was never moved by Prosecution; and the summoning orders were never passed.

On trial’s conclusion, both the petitioners, along with other accused, were convicted as stated by DSP Gurpreet Singh.

The Public Prosecutor Syal submitted that application under Section 319 was inadvertently moved by prosecution, but later withdrawn.

An anomalous situation has been created in view of their conviction without subjecting them to the trial.

Judicial Officer has convicted Petitioners without following basic principles of the criminal jurisprudence, it was held. At no stage were they given an opportunity to defend themselves.

Justice Gupta concluded that order exhibited a callous attitude and insensitivity to rights guaranteed to a citizen under the Article 21 of Constitution.

Picture Source :