JAILENDRA RAI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Syed Imran Ibrahim, learned counsel for the revisionists, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

(2.) The present criminal revision has been filed assailing the order dtd. 21/5/2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Varanasi in S.T. No. 1164 of 2021 (State vs. Srinivas and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 985 of 2018, under Ss. 307, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi whereby the application under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. moved by the O.P. No.2 has been allowed and the revisionists have been summoned to face trial of Case Crime No. 985 of 2018, under Ss. 307, 504, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi.

(3.) It has been vehemently contended by Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Counsel that the order impugned is patently illegal and has been passed against the settled principles of law and as such is not sustainable. The learned Court below has erred in law in omitting to consider the settled position of law to the effect that to summon an accused under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. the evidence which has already been tested once during the course of investigation should not be the same and there needs to be something more to enable the Court to exercise the power under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. The revisionists are lawyers by profession and practicing in the District Court Varanasi and have been implicated only in their professional capacity. A dispute exists between the O.P. No.2/first informant and one Kripa Shankar Rai and the revisionists have been impleaded as accused only pre-emptively. It is also contended that the exercise of power under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C. by the Court below is contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of S. Mohammad Ispahani vs. Yogendra Chandak and others reported in 2017 (16) SCC 226. Reliance is further placed on the decisions of the Apex Court reported in 2019 (7) SCC 806; 2019 (4) SCC 342 and 2017 (7) SCC 706. It is accordingly prayed that the revision be allowed and the order dtd. 21/5/2022 be set aside.