ABBAS Vs. STATE OF U P AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the order dated 15.12.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Budaun, in S.T. No. 372 of 2014 (State Vs. Shadab and others) (arising out of Case Crime No. 342 of 2014 P.S. Bisauli, District Budaun) whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while allowing the application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has summoned the applicant to face trial under Sections 364, 302, 201 I.P.C. alongwith other co-accused persons.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. on the point of admission and perused the record.

(3.) The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the court below has summoned the applicant in a routine manner without application of its judicial mind. It has been next contended that the court below has not considered that there was no clinching and cogent evidence against the applicant and only an observation that the applicant has been found involved in the occurrence is not at all sufficient to invoke the extra ordinary power conferred under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Apex Court in a catena of judgments has repeatedly held that the summoning under Section 319 Cr.P.C. stands on a different footing and it should be dealt with the higher standards by the courts, sparingly and only if, compelling reasons exist for taking cognizance against the person other than accused.