JAG NARAIN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Whether Revision against summoning order is maintainable," is the main point that falls for consideration in this revision, by means of which summoning order dated 18.08.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st, Jaunpur, in Complaint Case No. 1456 of 2005 (Dinesh Kumar vs. Jag Narain & others), under sections 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC has been challenged.

(2.) BY the impugned order, the revisionists Jag Narain, Gayatri Devi, Sangita and Umesh have been summoned to face the trial under sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC. on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant Dinesh Kumar (O.P. No.2 herein).

(3.) AT the outset, a preliminary objection was raised by Sri Rakesh Kumar Dubey, Advocate, appearing for the complainant, about maintainability of the Revision against summoning order and it was vehemently contended by him that in view of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Adalat Prasad vs. Rooplal Jindal and others [2004 (50) ACC 924] and Subramanium Sethuraman vs. State of Maharashtra and another[2005(51) ACC 684], the only remedy available to the accused against summoning order is to invoke the jurisdiction of High Court in the proceeding under section 482 Cr.P.C. and hence, this Revision against the summoning order is not maintainable, being barred by section 397 (2) Cr.P.C.