MISHRI LAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Kamal Dev Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arvind Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite party.

(2.) The present criminal revision has been filed seeking to set aside the judgement and order dtd. 17/11/2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Mainpuri in Session Trial No. 316 of 2014 (State vs. Anoj Kumar), under Ss. 307, 504 I.P.C., Police Station-Kishni, District-Mainpuri, arising out of Case Crime No. 266 of 2014, on the application of the opposite party no.2 filed under Sec. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[1].

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist has sought to assail the order passed by the court below by referring to the factual aspects of the case to contend that the revisionist has been falsely implicated in the criminal case. He has submitted that the jurisdiction under Sec. 319 of the Code is to be exercised in an extra-ordinary situation where there is a strong possibility of the conviction of the accused, who is proposed to be summoned, and the powers are not to be exercised in a routine manner. It is further pointed out that the Investigating Officer did not find any material against the revisionist and no charge-sheet having been submitted against him, there was no further material on the basis of which the trial court could have summoned the revisionist.