(1.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.5.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Sikar, camp at Neem-Ka-Thana, whereby an application moved by the petitioner under section 319 Cr. P.C. has been dismissed.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 2.9.96 at about 6.30 PM. when complainant's wife was going, she was attacked by Kishori, Jagdish, Sarjit and Sheo Narayan. Because of this attack, his wife became unconscious. The complainant's mother, who was walking behind his wife, was also assaulted. Subsequently, his father rushed to their rescue: his father was surrounded and assaulted by Ram Singh, Ram Kishore, Jagdish and other accused persons mentioned above. Subsequently, his father expired. On the basis of this report a formal FIR No. 101/96 was registered for the offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 302 IPC. However, after investigation while challan was submitted, against other accused persons, no challan was submitted against the present respondent Nos. 2-6. During the course of trial evidence started coming in about the involvement of these five persons in the alleged crime. Therefore, the complainant moved an application under section 319 Cr. P.C. But the learned Addl. Sessions Judge dismissed the said application vide order dated 29.5.2003. Hence, this petition before us.
(3.) Shri Anoop Dhand, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in the testimony of Ram Niwas (PW 2), Ramesh Kumar (PW 7), Kanesh (PW8), Bhagwati (PW 12), Kailash (PW 13), Ramji Lal (PW 15) and Sumitra (PW 17), there is sufficient evidence to point to the involvement of respondents Nos. 2 to 6 in the alleged offences. Consequently, he has argued that the learned Judge has erred in critically analysing the evidence at the stage of taking cognizance under section 319 Cr.P.C. and in rejecting the said application. The learned Trial Judge has, clearly, over stepped the jurisdiction vested in him. Therefore, the impugned order should be quashed and set aside.