PYARI DEVI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and the learned A.G.A. for the respondent no. 1 and perused the record.

(2.) THIS is an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. against the summoning order passed under section 319 Cr.P.C.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a very old lady aged about 83 years. No specific role of the applicant has been alleged by P.W.1, Sudha Singh. It was next submitted that when no evidence was found against the applicant during the investigation, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate was not justified in passing the summoning order only on the basis of the statement of P.W. 1 Sudha Singh. He should have recorded statements of other witnesses. Moreover, the said witness was not subjected to cross-examination. It was next submitted that neither the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate nor the learned Additional Sessions Judge recorded any specific finding that the statement of P.W. 1 Sudha Singh, if uncontroverted, would be sufficient to record a valid conviction against the applicant. In absence of such finding the summoning order was not proper.