ANSARULLAH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Syed Wajid Ali counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for opposite party no. 1 and Sri M.P. Tiwari learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

(2.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 25.06.2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (E.C. Act), Siddharth Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 52 of 2008, State Vs. Guddu @ Firoz, whereby the application of the prosecution under Sec. 319 Crimial P.C., 1973 has been allowed and the revisionist has been summoned by the trial court for facing trial.

(3.) The facts of the case are that a first information report was got registered by opposite party no. 2 with regard to an occurrence dated 12.06.2007 said to have taken place at 10:30 p.m regarding which F.I.R. was lodged on 12.06.2007 at about 23:45 hrs. as Case Crime No. 183 of 2007 under Sec. 307 IPC, P.S. Dumariaganj, District Siddharth Nagar. In the said FIR, the deponent has not been named as an accused. The entire allegations are against the named accuseds. The statement of injured was recorded on