Chandigarh, April 30
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that the trial court was required to record its satisfaction that the commission of a criminal offence by an accused was possible on the basis of material placed before it at the time of framing charge.
The assertion came as the Bench of Justice Tejinder Singh Dhindsa and Justice Pankaj Jain dismissed an appeal by Jagtar Singh Johal against the NIA and another respondent. He had challenged order dated January 24 dismissing his application seeking discharge in a case registered for attempt to murder, criminal conspiracy and other offences under Sections 120-B and 307 of the IPC, and the Arms Act and the UAPA.
The Bench was told it was found during investigation that an attempt made to kill complainant Amit Arora (Shiv Sena leader) was part of a larger conspiracy involving series of targeted/attempted killings of persons belonging to specific communities. His counsel contended the material collected by the NIA was only in the form of extra judicial confessions.
The Bench asserted the Special Court — while dismissing the application — held that there was, prima facie, sufficient evidence on record to establish that appellant had conspired, abated and facilitated the incident of the terror act.
Justice Jain asserted: “At the time of framing of charge, the law prescribes test of ‘prima facie case’ which shall connote that at the time of framing of charge, the probative value of the material on record is not to be gone intohellip;.. The court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record with a view to find out if the facts emerging there from taken at their face value, disclose the existence of all the ingredients constituting the alleged offence or not.” The Bench did not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. But the appellant would be entitled to raise pleas during trial.
Trial court to examine ‘prima facie’ offence made out in case, rules Punjab and Haryana High Court
{$excerpt:n}
