JANARDAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and the learned A. G. A.

(2.) THE order dated 24-11-2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, District Azamgarh is wholly illegal. THE prayer made by the prosecution was at the appropriate moment under Section 319 Cr. P. C. as P. W. 1 Janardan Singh was already examined in the trial. Examination-in-chief during the trial is sufficient to summon any person as an accused to face trial along with other co- accused persons whose complicity in the case comes to the light in the same crime. THE trial Court is not supposed to differ the matter only for the reason that only examination-in-chief of the witness has been recorded. THE finding recorded by the trial Court that on the basis of examination-in-chief that there is no reason to summon the accused, therefore, is absolutely illegal and cannot be sustained. I do not mean to say that whenever the examination-in-chief is recorded, the trial Court must summon each and every person named in the examination-in-chief. THEse are the matter which differ from case to case and fact to fact of the case. In the present case the person who was desire to be summoned by the, prosecution Indra Bahadur was assigned the main role of shooting from a gun. THE said statement which was recorded in the trial finds support form the F. I. R. as well as from 161 Cr. P. C. statement. Consequently there was enough reasons before the trial Court to come to a conclusion that summoning of Indra Bahadur is desirable in the trial as there was cogent and reliable evidence against him that he is one of the main culprits in the crime.