(1.) CHALLENGE in this revision is to the order dated 24.12.2012 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge Court no. 4, Etawah in S. T. no. 122 of 2011 State Vs. Sadan Singh u/s 307, 506 IPC P. S. Kotwali Etawah, whereby the application filed by the revisionist for taking cognizance against opposite parties no. 2 to 4 u/s 319 Cr. P. C. had been rejected.
(2.) THE facts germane to the revision are that the revisionist lodged a written report in P. S. Kotwali, Etawah on 30.1.2011 at 2:25 p.m. stating that on 29.1.2011, he along with his father (Shesh Kumar Gupta) was returning on a motorcycle with cash of Rs.3,00,000/ -, and when they reached near the Basic Shiksha Office at about 8:30 p.m., Sadan Bhadauriya, Bharat Singh Bhadauriya and another unknown person intercepted them and started abusing his father, when they objected, all the three persons with intention to kill attacked Shesh Kumar Gupta (the father of the informant) with knife and took away Rs.3,00,000/ -. A case at crime no. 79 of 2011 u/s 394, 307, 506, 120 -B IPC was registered against Sadan Bhadauriya (charge sheeted), Bharat Singh Bhadauriya, Anand Kumar and Ankur Gupta along with one unnamed person. It was further alleged in the First Information Report that the informant, out of fear, ran away from the spot towards the bushes and as he could not immediately reach home or lodge the report some passers -by had informed the police that his father was lying on the road. The informant further stated that Anand Kumar and Ankur Gupta instigated the attack on his father. The police after investigation submitted charge sheet only against Sadan Bhadauriya, under Sections 307 and 506 I.P.C.
(3.) DURING the course of trial, statements of Saurabh Gupta (first informant) and his injured father Shesh Kumar Gupta were recorded as PW -3 and PW -4 respectively. However, complainant Saurabh Gupta (P.W.3) turned hostile and stated that when his father was attacked he could not recognize the assailants as he ran away out of fear and when he returned on spot he could not find his father there and later he was found in the hospital, in injured condition. He was, accordingly, declared hostile by the prosecution. However, in the statement of Shesh Kumar Gupta (the injured) PW -4, the complicity of the assailants Sadan Bhdauriya, Bharat Singh Bhadauriya and one unknown person was disclosed. He also stated that at some distance Anand Kumar and Ankur Gupta were standing. On the strength of the statement of P.W.4 an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., was filed to summon Bharat Singh Bhadauriya, Anand Kumar and Ankur Gupta as accused. The Court below considering the testimony of the informant (P.W.3), who had turned hostile, rejected the application. The complainant filed Criminal Revision no. 2922 of 2012 in this Court, which had been allowed vide order dated 11.9.2012 and the matter was remanded for re -examination. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties' counsel had again rejected the application filed by the revisionist u/s 319 Cr. P. C. through impugned order dated 24.12.2012. Aggrieved, the revisionist has come up in revision.