Bhante Shanti Rakshit vs The State Of U.P. And Ors.
2022 Latest Caselaw 1093 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 16
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 390 of 2014
 

 
Revisionist :- Bhante Shanti Rakshit
 
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. And Ors.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Ram Chandra Dwivedi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

Case called in revise. No one appeared on behalf of the revisionist.

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record with his assistance.

The present revision has been preferred with a prayer to summon the lower court record and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 03.06.2014, passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (PA), Court No. 2, Unnao in Spl. S.T. No. 235 of 2008 passed in State Vs. Mannu @ Abhimanyu Yadav and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 167 of 2008, under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)10 of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao, with a further prayer to summon, try and punish the proposed accused persons i.e. Pappu Yadav, Naresh Yadav and Doober Prasad Yadav.

The revisionist is the complainant and he move application 10 Kha and 11 Kha, under Sectikon 319 Cr.P.C. to summon Pappu Yadav, Naresh Yadav and Doober Prasad Yadav. In the said application, it has been stated that the complainant has been examined as P.W. -1 and he has named all the five accused who assaulted him. The application was rejected by the court below by the impugned order dated 03.06.2014. Hence the present revision has been preferred by the complainant. From the record, it transpires that P,W. -1 had deposed before the court below that accused Mannu Yadav and Ramkrishan Yadav threatened him on 29.02.2008, 23.03.2008 and 25.03.2008 and the said information was sent through Chhunnu Kuril. P.W. -2 deposed before the court that Ramkrishan Yadav and Mannu Yadav called him and they used caste-based words and threatened him. The said statement indicated that the accused Mannu Yadav and Ramkrishan Yadav had threatened Chhunnu Kuril whereas three persons namely, Pappu Yadav, Naresh Yadav and Doober Prasad Yadav did not make such threatening, thus the offence is made out only against Mannu Yadav and Ramkrishan Yadav. The court below dismissed the application on 03.06.2014 with an observation that no offence against Pappu Yadav, Naresh Yadav and Doober Prasad Yadav, is made out, therefore, I do not find any reason or justification to take a different opinion.

Consequently, the revision fails and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 11.4.2022

Arun K. Singh