Criminal revision against an order summoning the applicants as co-accused under Section 319 CrPC. The Single Bench applied Hardeep Singh precedent, holding the summon was based on valid eyewitness testimony, and dismissed the revision.
The criminal revision was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3317 of 2018
Revisionist :- Prem Shankar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Prabhat Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Sri Deepak Dubey, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2/informant in the Court today, the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Prabhat Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionists and in oppostion, Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.
Perused the record.
This criminal revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 14.08.2018 passed by Sessions Judge, Etawah, in Sessions Trial No. 81 of 2018 (State v. Govind and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 0395 of 2017, Police Station - Basrehar, District - Etawah, whereby application of the prosecution under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Code') was allowed and the revisionists - Prem Shankar, Ravindra, Aadesh and Dharam Swarup were summoned for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the revisionists contended that in this case, after investigation, the police has submitted charge sheet against co-accused - Govind, Guddu Singh, Ashok Kumar, Ramakant and Karmaveer Singh, exonerating the revisionists. Revisionist no. 2 Ravindra had presented an application under Section 156(3) of the Code against Kunwar Pal, son of opposite party no. 2 Ved Prakash Shakya. Due to enmity, this first information report has been lodged. He further contended that only on the basis of the examination-in-chief of P.W.1 informant Ved Prakash, the impugned order has been passed, which is not sustainable.
Per contra, learned learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court.
From the perusal of first information report, it reveals that Ved Prakash, father of deceased Rahul has filed the F.I.R. naming the revisionists just after one and half hour of the occurrence. Ved Prakash is the eye witness of the occurrence who has supported the prosecution version in his examination-in-chief before the trial court.
As per principle laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Hardeep Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others reported in 2014 (3) SCC 92 , the accused may be summoned under Section 319 of the Code only on the basis of examination-in-chief of the eye-witnesses.
In view of above, I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court and the same needs no interference.
Resultantly, the instant revision, being devoid of merit, is dismissed .
However, if the revisionists appear before the court below and file bail application, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 5.10.2018
I. Batabyal
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Sessions Judge's order summoning the revisionists as additional accused offences under Section 319 CrPC.
Whether the summons under Section 319 CrPC was sustainable based solely on the examination-in-chief of the eyewitness.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hardeep Singh and others v. State of Punjab and othersApplied¶12
Hardeep Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, 2014 (3) SCC 92 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Prem Shankar And 3 Others
State Of U.P.
Ved Prakash Shakya
Umesh Chandra Tripathi
Batabyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
