RAJU Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Vinod Kumar Tripathi holding brief of Sri Santosh Kumar Dubey, learned Counsel for the revisionists and the learned A.G.A.

(2.) EXERCISING power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. 3, Gautam Budh Nagar in S.T. No. 250 of 2006, State v. Raju and others, under Section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Dankaru, District Gautam Budh Nagar has re -summoned the P.W.2 for further cross -examination vide his impugned order dated 9 -11 -2006. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Amar Nath and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr., 1977 SCC (Cr.) 585, the said order of summoning a witness is nothing but an interlocutory order and a revision against such an order is barred under Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. Further the trial Court was of the opinion that for just decision of the case re -examination of P.W.2 is a must. This discretionary power of the trial Court should not be in any way curtailed by this Court while exercising its revisional power specially when the revision is not maintainable.