KARTIK Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the Respondent State and perused the record.

(2.) This is a revision against the order dated 16.8.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge, Junior Division, Court No. 3, Ghaziabad in criminal case No. 2317 of 2008, State v. Pintu and Ors. whereby the learned Magistrate refused to review the summoning order.

(3.) The view of the learned Magistrate is perfectly correct and is based on the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Adalat Prasad v. Roop Lal Jindal, 2004 3 Crimes 350, therefore, the present revision has no substance.