MOHIT Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) This Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 19.09.2019 passed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Court No. 2, Bulandshahr summoned the applicant under Sections 376 , 342 and 323 I.P.C. arising out of Case Crime No. 373 of 2018 in S.T. No. 699 of 2018, P.S. Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that victim is a married lady having two children. Victim later on developed relationship with the accused Harendra who is brother of the accused with whom she was living with her children and the accused applicant has been implicated because of being brother of the main accused, Harendra who is lying in prison. The owner of the house, Ompal Singh has stated that victim was a tenant in his home and has not supported the prosecution version. He has not seen accused applicants coming to the house of victim nor the other witnesses from vicinity stated that the accused was ever seen coming to the house of victim, on the basis of these statements of the witnesses, the I.O. has exonerated the accused applicant but the trial court has erroneously summoned the accused in this case under Section 319 Cr.P.C., hence the impugned order should be set-aside.