SHEHJAHAN Vs. STATE OF U P & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Arun Sinha, learned counsel for the revisionist; Shri Sharad Dixit, learned AGA for the State respondent and Shri Amrit Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 4 and also perused the record.

(2.) THIS criminal revision has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 17.11.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sesisons Judge, Court No.35, District Barabanki in Sessions Trial No.1275 of 2011 (State v. Ruby) by which the application filed by the revisionist under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning opposite party nos.2 to 4 to face trial under Sections 302, 498 -A, 304 -B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been rejected.

(3.) AS per factual matrix of the case, FIR was lodged by the revisionist on 22.5.2011, in Police Station Kotwali Haidergarh, District Barabanki, under Sections 498 -A, 304 -B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the in -laws of her deceased daughter. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted excluding opposite party nos.2 to 4, who are Jeth, husband and dewar the deceased. When trial commenced the revisionist moved an application for summoning opposite party nos.2 to 4 to face trial. One application was earlier rejected by the trial court on 5.6.2012. The second application too was rejected by the trial court by the impugned order.