JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

2. This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 23.12.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Court no.3 Ballia in S.T. No.297 of 2017 (State vs. Gulab Gond) crime no.745 of 2017, U/s 307, 34 IPC, P.S. Ubhaon, District Ballia. By the impugned order, the learned court below on an application of prosecution in exercise of powers U/s 319 Cr.P.C. has summoned the revisionist accused to face trial.

3. With regard to incident dated 17.06.2017 at about 9:00 pm, an FIR was lodged by first informant Preetam on the same date at 20:30 O'clock alleging therein that the complainant is resident of village Jam Basnai P.S. Rasra, District Ballia. He had come at his nanihal village Babhnauli in connection with marriage of his maternal uncle Sunil to be held on 18.06.2017. Today on 17.06.2017 at about 9:00 pm, he with his maternal uncle Sonu alias Rohit was going on a motorcycle. When they reached near the Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Inter-college, and was talking with a vendor then a motorcycle on which three persons were riding came from the side of Shahpur Afgah road. Two persons came down from the motorcycle and reached near them, one of them asked his maternal uncle whether his name is Sonu, he replied that his name is Rohit, on this he said that he tease his sister and opened fire on him. The other person also opened fire on his maternal uncle and both of them riding the motorcycle ran away from the spot. The maternal uncle of the complainant fell down, due to darkness the complainant could not identify the assailants. The injured was taken to Sier Hospital from where he was referred to District Mau. It is further alleged that the complainant has dispute about the landed property with neighbour Gulab Gond and he suspect his hand in this incident. During investigation the names of Guddu Gond and Rajesh Gond came into light. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted against Gulab Gond and Guddu Gond. The revisionist Rajesh Gond was exonerated. The trial commenced before the sessions court and after examination of four prosecution witnesses, an application U/s 319 Cr.P.C. was moved to summon the revisionist Rajesh Gond for trial. The learned court below by the impugned order has allowed the application and summoned the revisionist accused for trial.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist contended that the revisionist is not named in the FIR. The complainant in his statement has reiterated the version of the FIR and has not named the revisionist accused. He has also stated that due to darkness he could not identify the assailants. The name of the revisionist came at the first time in the statement of injured after 22 days of the incident and 15 days after discharge from the hospital. It is further contended that the complainant P.W.-1 in his statement has specifically stated that he identify the family members of Gulab Gond. It is further contended that there are major contradictions and discrepancies in the oral evidence produced before the trial court. Further the Investigating Officer during trial has collected the evidence about the fact that revisionist was not present at the place of occurrence. At the time of incident, he was at Bombay, the CCTV footage of the mall from where he was shopping was produced before the Investigating Officer, the photo of this CCTV footage was get identified by Investigating Officer from the injured and her mother and they have identified the revisionist accused in it. The CDR of the mobile of the revisionist also shows his presence at some other place and not at the place of occurrence at the time of incident. From the aforesaid evidence, the Investigating Officer has submitted final report against the revisionist but during trial on the basis of statement of injured Rohit Kumar alias Sonu, the learned trial court has passed the impugned summoning order, While his