Satpal Singh vs State Of Haryana on 14 December, 2017


CRM-M-47742-2017 (OM)
Date of decision: 14.12.2017

Satpal Singh …..Petitioner
State of Haryana ……Respondent

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kuldip Singh

Present: Mr.Tarundeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Kuldip Singh, J. (Oral)

Impugned in the present petition filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C. is the order dated 9.11.2017 Annexure P3, vide which the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra allowed the revision against the

order of Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kurukshetra and ordered the

framing of additional charge under Section 354 IPC against Satpal Singh.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the charge was

framed at a belated stage when the case was fixed for defence evidence. No

new evidence has come. I am of the view that the learned Additional

Sessions Judge has given sound reasoning in support of his order, stating

that the additional charge is required to be framed. Charge can be framed at

any stage of the case. There is no illegality and infirmity in the impugned


Resultantly, the present petition stands dismissed.

14.12.2017 (Kuldip Singh)
gk Judge

Whether speaking/ reasoned: Yes
Whether Reportable: No

1 of 1
15-12-2017 23:22:28 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *