ZEENAT PARVEEN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Brij Raj Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and learned AGA for respondent No. 1. None present for revisionists, so the impugned judgement and order was perused.

(2.) IT appears that an FIR was lodged by Abdul Wahid in police station Khurja, District Bulandshahr, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act regarding death of his daughter Nigar Parveen by her matrimonial relation for demand of dowry. The investigating officer, after investigation, submitted charge sheet only against Zaheer @ Chhotey and Mugirul under sections 498A, 304B, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. He found that Reshma and Zeenat were wrongly implicated. He found that these are married nanad of the deceased. Reshma lives in Gangdundwara and Zeenat is living in Khurja along with their family. After framing of charge, P.W.1 Abdul Wahid was examined and after his examination-in-chief, an application under section 319 Cr. P.C. Was moved to summon Smt. Reshma and Zeenat to face the trial. Learned court below after hearing the prosecution, summoned Smt. Reshma and Zeenat to face trial under section 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act. by the impugned order, against which this criminal revision has been preferred.

(3.) IN Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab (1979) 1 SCC 345), the Apex Court while dealing with the ambit and scope of section 319 Cr. P, C., held that the court has power to add any person as accused, if there is sufficient evidence indicating his involvement in the offence.