Shailendra vs State Of U.P.
2022 Latest Caselaw 1033 ALL

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1033 ALL
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2022

Allahabad High Court

Shailendra vs State Of U.P. on 8 April, 2022

Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 87
 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2438 of 2021
 
Revisionist :- Shailendra
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Dinesh Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

Heard Mr. Dinesh Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State.

The instant revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 11.08.2021 passed by Special Judge, U.P. Dacoity Affected Area Act, 1993, Court No.4, District Chitrakoot on application dated 15.02.2020 under Section 319 Cr.P.C. in Special Session Trial No.164 of 2014 CNR No.UPCH010019022014 (State of U.P. vs. Chunkani) under Sections 307 and 302 IPC Police Station Karwi District Chitrakoot by which the court below has allowed the application and summoned the revisionist to face trial.

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that on 21.06.2017, the revisionist has filed an application for summoning the accused persons on the ground of suspicion but nothing has been done. On 15.02.2020, the informant has moved an application before court below for summoning the accused persons and court below vide order dated 11.08.2020 has illegally summoned the revisionist. He has further submitted that the court below has passed the impugned order on the basis of presumption because there was neither any evidence or material evidence on record nor any prosecution witness has corroborated the incident as alleged in the first information report, hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for setting aside the impugned order dated 11.08.2021 and has submitted that the same does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. He has submitted that the revisionist has been summoned on the basis of statement of Hari Mohan PW-1.

After having heard the learned counsel for the parties present and perused the impugned order as well as material brought on record, I am of the view that the impugned summoning order is based upon relevant consideration and supported by cogent reasons, the same does not suffer from any irregularity, illegality or infirmity requiring any interference by this Court.

The revision fails and is hereby dismissed. The revision is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 8.4.2022

Ajeet