During the course of recording of evidence, statement of the complainant Birmati was recorded as PW-4, wherein the allegations in the FIR were reiterated and on the basis of that, respondents No.2 and 3 i.e. Bala Devi and Indu were prayed to be summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Learned Judicial Magistrate, Narnaul heard the parties and after perusing the record and appreciating judicial precedents, as applicable in the case came to the conclusion that the application filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning do not find any justification and hence, dismissed the same vide his order dated 1.12.2018. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed revision against the same before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul. The parties were heard and record was perused. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul found that after a thorough investigation, both respondents No.2 and 3 were kept in column No.2 when the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed. He appreciated the statement of PW-4 complainant and PW-1 Vikas and did not find any force in the same for summoning the respondents under Section 319 Cr.P.C. It was also found that the earlier litigations were admittedly pending between the parties which further created the doubt on the credibility of both the witnesses i.e. PW-1 and PW-4, on whose deposition the present application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed. The law settled by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Hardeep vs. State of Punjab and others, 2014 (3)
