TEHSILDAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision is directed against the order dated 8.8.2014 passed by Sri Vinay Kumar Dwivedi, dditional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Varanasi in S.T.No.57 of 2014 (State Vs. Tehsildar Pandey and others) under sections 302, 120 -B, I.P.C., Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi, whereby revisionists have been summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C. to be tried alongwith the other accused.

(2.) BEFORE examining the validity of the impugned order, on the basis of grounds raised in the revision, I would like to place on record briefly the facts of the present case.

(3.) ON 5th April, 2013, Smt.Vandana, wife of the accused Pramod Pandey, daughter -in -law of the revisionists had lodged an F.I.R. at 1.30 p.m. at Police Station Sarnath stating therein that presently she was residing at Hiramanpur colony and supervising the construction work, with her husband, of newly constructed house of her mother -in -law. Earlier she had reported against her husband a matrimonial dispute in the nature of cruelty for demand of dowry which was amicably settled. Her father Lallan Pandey, after talking to her husband on phone came to her matrimonial house on that day at about 12.30 p.m. to take her back but her husband declined to send her. When her father started to return empty handed, her husband requested him to wait, in the meantime, her brother -in -law Pradeep Pandey came there and gave him a small weapon, who shot her father. After firing several times, her husband and brother -in -law ran away taking with them her one and a half years daughter Khushi. On her way to hospital, his father has died. In the F.I.R., Pramod Pandey and Pradeep Pandey were arrayed as accused. During investigation, name of the present revisionists came into light and a separate chargesheet against the revisionists was filed under sections 302, 120 -B, and 34 I.P.C. After the case was committed to the Court of Session proceedings under sections 226 and 228 Cr.P.C. were held.