RAJ KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been preferred against the order dated 05.04.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Kanpur Nagar in ST No. 634 of 2014 (State Vs. Raj Kumar and others) whereby the discharge application moved by the revisionist Raj Kumar bearing No. 21 Kha was dismissed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged at Crime No. 211 of 2014 under Section 302 IPC and 7th Criminal Law Amendment Act and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Govind Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar against the revisionist and others. Investigation commenced and ended into a charge sheet.

(3.) The learned counsel for revisionist has submitted that only false allegations of hatching conspiracy have been levelled against the revisionist and there is no evidence against him to charge with criminal conspiracy. Independent witnesses have not stated about involvement of the revisionist in the present case. There is no chain of evidence to disclose the offence of Section 120 -B IPC against the revisionist. It is further submitted that initially, the revisionist and Santosh Kuril were named and role of firing upon Prasang Gupta alias Guddu, brother of opposite party No. 2 (informant) was assigned to the revisionist along with two unknown accused persons. But during the investigation, names of Sanjay Tiwari, Amit Jaiswal and Abhinab Jaiswal came into light for firing upon the deceased. It is also contended that after submission of the charge sheet, the revisionist moved the aforesaid discharge application which was rejected by the learned Court below without applying its judicial mind.