PREM CHAND Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Samir Garg, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Gaurav Kakkar, Advocate, on behalf of opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. The order dated 9.3.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, court no.12, Bulandshahar, in S.T. No. 1015 of 2007, State Vs. Jagdish and another is impugned in the instant revision, whereby the revisionist has been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Evidence of P.W.1 as well as P.W. 2 has been recorded. I have perused the First Information Report registered at case crime no. 81-A/305-A of 2007 under Sections 364, 302, 201 I.P.C. The name of the revisionist appears to be at serial no.4 in the array of the accused. However, the police did not submit any charge sheet against him. An application was moved on behalf of the prosecution for summoning the revisiionist under Section 319 Cr.P.C. during the trial. After evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 was recorded, the learned Sessions Judge summoned the revisionist to face the trial along with other accused, who were facing the trial. The Sessions Judge has expressed his satisfaction that the same evidence which has come on record against the accused, who are facing the trial, also appears to be against the revisionist, Prem Chand, therefore, it is appropriate that he should be summoned to face the trial. The main emphasis of the counsel for the revisionist is that there are two First Information Reports lodged in respect of two murder cases and in one case when an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was moved, the same was rejected by the Sessions Judge. I have perused the First Information Report of the said case as well wherein the revisionist is not named, therefore, I do not think that both cases stand at par and identical to each other. However, I am not inclined to express any opinion on merits of the evidence recorded during the trial and do not find any good ground for interference in the order impugned in the instant revision. The revision lacks merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in the event the revisionist appears before the courts below within a period of three weeks from today and applies for bail in case crime no. 81-A/305-A of 2007, (S.T. No. 1015 of 2007) under Sections 364, 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station R.O.P. Chola, Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the courts below as expeditiously as possible. It goes without saying that the trial will be commenced de novo and an opportunity for moving an application for discharge as well as cross examining the witnesses, will be afforded to the revisionist.