KUNWAR PAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision, preferred by the revisionist under Section 397/401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr. P. C.), is directed against the judgment and or der dated 03-05- 2003 passed by Ses sions Judge, Hardwar in Criminal Revi sion No. 596/2002, Cyan Chand & oth ers Vs. State of Uttaranchal, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 8-10-2002 passed by IInd FTC/civil Judge (Senior Division), Roorkee.

(2.) I have heard Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri M. A. Khan, learned brief holder for the State/respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Sri S. K. Shandilya, learned counsel for re spondent No. 4 and perused the entire material available in the file. No one ap pears for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6, though service is reported to be sufficient.

(3.) AS per Section 319 Cr. P. C. quoted above, where, in the court of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed. From a perusal of the order dated 8-10-2002 passed by IInd FTC/civil Judge (Senior Division) Roorkee, it appears that trial court has summoned-the Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 on the ba sis of the evidence of the four eyewitnesses who have supported the prosecution case and they have given their spe cific evidence against Respondent Nos. 4 to 6. Out of these four eyewitnesses, one is the injured witnesses P. W. 1 Meghraj. Besides this, Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are also named in the FIR. Due to the foregoing facts and circumstances, I do not find any illegality, impropriety or incorrectness in the judgment and order dated 8-10-2002 passed by IInd FTC/civil Judge (Senior Division) Roorkee. AS such, the judgment and order dated 03-05-2003 passed by Ses sions Judge, Hardwar is not correct and justified and the same is not as per law and the evidence available on record.