GOVIND MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned APP for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the order dated 07.03.2017 passed in S.C. No. 132 of 2008 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Deoghar, whereby the application preferred by the prosecution under section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) was allowed and the petitioner has been summoned to face trial.

(3.) It has been stated that the petitioner is the father-in-law of the deceased. Learned counsel submits that the husband and other in-laws of the deceased had faced trial and they were acquitted by the learned trial Court. It has been stated that on the same set of allegation, the petitioner has been put on trial. The petitioner is an employee of Chitranjan Railway Factory and on the date of occurrence he was present on his duty and the Investigating Officer has been satisfied with his plea of alibi and therefore no charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner. Learned counsel thus submits that general allegations have been made against the accused persons and on such consideration the learned trial court had acquitted the persons who had faced the trial. It has been stated that the discretion which has been exercised by the learned trial court while allowing the application preferred by the prosecution under section 319 Crimial P.C., 1973 is not as per the norms so as to allow the application under section 319 Crimial P.C., 1973 and to summon an accused to face trial more than a prima facie case is required. In the facts and circumstances of the case he thus prays that the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside.