MRIGENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed by the applicant/petitioners under Ss. 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure asking for quashing of order dtd. 26/11/2013 whereby the trial Court exercising the power provided under Sec. 319/193 of CrPC decided the application directing that the name of present applicant/petitioners be included in the array of accused persons and also directed that arrest warrant be issued against them for securing their presence before the Court.

(2.) The said order is being assailed by the present applicant/petitioners mainly on the ground that from the impugned order itself, it reveals that the trial Court has relied upon the statements of PW-1, PW-4, PW-6 and PW-7, namely, Ramrati, Raj Kumar Shukla, Ganesh Prasad Shukla and Kamlesh Prasad Shukla respectively, in which, they have taken the name of present applicant/petitioners and observed that as per their statement, the present applicant/petitioners should be made accused and as such, directed that they be arrested and produced before the Court so as to conduct a trial against them in relation to the offence registered vide Crime No.373/2003 under Ss. 307/376 (2A)/436 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Shri Sanjay Agrawal, learned senior counsel and other counsels appearing for the applicant/petitioners have submitted that though the trial Court has taken shelter of the statement of those witnesses, but from perusal of their statement, it is clear that they have not taken the name of present applicant/petitioners and as such, exercising the power provided under Sec. 319 of CrPC by the trial Court is absolutely illegal and the order making the present applicant/petitioners accused in the alleged crime deserves to be set aside.