ISHARAR BEGUM Vs. DISTRICT/SESSIONS JUDGE DISTRICT MAINPURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing the impugned order dated 2-12-2008 passed by Civil Judge (SD), Court No. 2 Mainpuri and order dated 6-2-2009 passed by Sessions Judge Mainpuri.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA and perused the annexures filed alongwith the writ petition.

(3.) IT is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have no concern and they are living separately and were not making dowry demand. It is further submitted that the investigating officer after investigation has not submitted charge sheet against the petitioners and the trial court after placing reliance in the statement of PW 1 to PW-3 allowed application under section 319 Cr. P. C. and summoned the petitioners illegally and even Sessions Judge, Mainpuri has dismissed the revision without appreciating the entire evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the power under section 319 Cr. P. C. is to be exercised cautiously and the person should be summoned if mainly there is substantive direct evidence showing complicity. He has cited rulings giving in Ramesh and others vs. State of Tamil Nadu [2005 (52)ACC 45] and Brindaban Das and others vs. State of West Bengal (2009) 3 Supreme Court Cases 329.