(1.) In this criminal revision the question that has fallen for consideration is whether any interference with the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Midnapur refusing to add the opposite party Nos. 1, 2 & 3 as accused in the pending sessions trial, is necessary. In this case charge was framed against the added opposite party Nos. 5 to 27 under section 302 I.P.C. and examination of as many as four prosecution witnesses including the present petitioner has been completed. At this stage prosecution made an application before the learned Court below for making the opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 accused in the said proceeding under section 319 Or. P.C. in view of the evidence obtained in the case implicating the said 3 persons who were not charge-sheeted as accused. On consideration of the evidence so far adduced and the statements recorded under section 161 Cr. P.C. the learned Additional Sessions Judge however did not find it to be a fit case for taking action against the opposite party Nos. 1, 2 and 3 under section 319 Cr. P.C. Being aggrieved by the said order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge the petitioner who was examined as PW-2 in the learned Court below has preferred this revisional application.
(2.) As I have already mentioned the examination of four witnesses has been completed by the learned Court below. Out of those four witnesses PW-4 was only tendered, but he was neither examined nor cross-examined. PW-1, Kanak Bala Das and PW-2, Minati Das are sisters. The deceased Motilal was their brother. The trial in the court below relates to a charge of murder under section 302 I.P.C. Concerning the death of Motilal. The contention of the petitioner as 'made in tins revisional application is that on 6th September, 1989 the opposite party No. 1, Radhakanta Parts came to the house of the petitioner at about 1/1-30 p.m. and took away the said Motilal from the house and then at about 3/3-30 p.m. Modal retained but after a while he again went out and when he was sitting by the side of Shiva temple, the O.P. No. 1, Radhakanta Patra, O.P. No. 2, Madan Mohan Patra and O.P. No. 3, Prabhat Pradhan took him away and after sometime the petitioner Minati and her sister Kanak Bala heard a hue and cry and then at about 8-t10 p.m. O.P. No. 1, Radhakanta came with his garments wet with blood stains and with a lathi in his hand and the petitioner and her sister asked him about the whereabouts of their brother Motilal, but the O.P. No. 1 was at first reluctant to say anything but later he said brat Motilal went with him as well as with OR Nos. 2 and 3, but thereafter what happened he did not know and brat subsequently one Patio alias Asian. Mazumder, Sudhanshu and Golak came and said that they would search and find out Motilal. It is the further contention of the petitioner that being suspicious the petitioner along with her sister went in search of their brother and they found brat the dead body of their brother was lying on tire party field near the house of one Bhanu Das who told that motilal was murdered. This Bhanu Das bas been examined in the court below as PW-3. It is also the allegation in the revisional applcation that Patla, Sudhanshu and Golak then came there and began to shout that Ajoy Maity and Sanjay Maity committed murder of Motilal and they along with other villagers went in procession to the house of Ajoy and Sanjoy and looted away the articles from their house. It is the further allegation of the petitioner that thereafter when police came the said Golak Behari Das Mahapatha and the aforesaid persons namely, Patio alias Asim Majumder and Sudhanshu were found talking with the police and the said persons, did not allow the petitioner and her sister any opportunity to talk to the police and tell the actual facts. The grievance of the petitioner is that the police did not investigate the case properly and the petitioner made several representations to different authorities for proper investigation but without any effect and ultimately on being influenced by political pressure the police submitted charge-sheet against wrong persons leaving aside the real culprits, namely, the opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 herein.
(3.) At this stage it will be profitable to read section 319 Cr. P.C. which runs thus :