KALLU Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revision petition filed under Ss. 397/401 of Cr. P.C., the petitioners have challenged the impugned order dated 11-9-02 passed by Sessions Judge, Bhind whereby the Court below allowed the application of the prosecution under S. 319, Cr. P.C. and on the basis of statements of Ravindra (PW-3), Ranvir Singh (PW-4) and Devendra (PW-7), directed that the petitioners be added as accused persons in the trial.

(2.) Ravindra (PW-3) is the nephew of deceased. Ranvir Singh (PW-4) is the son of the deceased and Devendra (PW-7) is the grand son of the deceased. As per prosecution story, incident took place on 3-6-00 at about 3 a.m. in the night. Mehtab Singh was sleeping in the open courtyard. Ravindra (PW-3) and Devendra (PW-7) were also sleeping near him. At about 3 a.m., Ramlakhan, Kallu s/o Ramlakhan, Munna Singh s/o Ramlakhan, Balram s/o Ramlakhan and Saligram s/o Ramlakhan came on spot. Balram was carrying "Ballam", Ramlakhan was carrying "Farsa" and remaining accused persons were carrying "Lathi" in their hands. They assaulted Mehtab Singh. Ramlakhan gave Farsa blow to Mehtab Singh. As a result of assault, he died on spot and thereafter all the accused persons ran away, but the police filed chargesheet only against Ramlakhan as the FIR was lodged only against him and none of the present petitioners were named either in the FIR or in the statement recorded under S. 161 of the CrPC by the prosecution. After the evidence of all the aforesaid witnesses was recorded before the Court below, the Court below directed that it appears that the petitioners have also participated in the commission of crime and therefore, the Court took cognizance against them and directed that the petitioners be also summoned through warrant of arrest as co-accused in the case against which this revision petitioner has been filed by the petitioners.

(3.) Shri Madhukar Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the chargesheet there is no material against the petitioners. Their names do not appear in the FIR as well as in the statements recorded under S. 161 of the Cr. P.C. He further submitted that the only allegation against the petitioners in the Court statements is that the petitioners were also present carrying "Lathi" in their hands at the place of occurrence and at the time of commission of crime. His further submission, is that there is no allegation that they have caused any injury by "Lathi" to the deceased and as per medical evidence also, the deceased has not received any "Lathi" injury.