JUDGMENT

Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J.

Instant criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist against order dated 27.10.2020, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Court No. 1, Moradabad in Sessions Trial No. 587 of 2019 (State v. Furkan Sir and others), under Sections 376-D, 313, 328, 120-B I.P.C., P.S.-Bhojpur, District- Moradabad arising out of case crime no. 160 of 2019, whereby the application 319 Cr.P.C. of the revisionist as paper no. 11 B has been rejected.

2. Heard Sri Shiv Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for opposite party Nos. 2 to 5.

3. The factual matrix of the case relevant from present criminal revision are that the revisionist, who is informant in S.T. No. 587 of 2019 State v. Fukran and others under Section 373 , 313, 328, 120B I.P.C., P.S.- Bhojpur, District- Moradabad arising out of Case Crime No. 160 of 2019. She moved an application at the stage of trial of the case under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the accused persons named in F.I.R. Fukran s/o Ayyub, Shahnawaz @Shanu, Mohd. Gaus@ Guddu, Seema Bhatnagar, whose name was dropped in charge-sheet and I.O. filed charge-sheet only against two accused Fukran Sir and Shivanand Bhatanagar to face trial for prosecution for these charges. The informant/revisionist lodged F.I.R. at P.S. Bhojpur, District- Moradabad on 11.06.2019 on written report, which is addressed to S.P.(Rural Area), wherein she stated that applicant is resident of district Moradabad, her mother passed away and her father is suffering from paralysis. Accused Fukran Sir s/o Mukhtar Ahmad expressed sympathy to her and gave her an assurance that he will get her admitted in B.A. I and two years back he called her at the place of accused Shivanand Bhatnagar where she was made to consume an adulterated cold drink, she became intoxicated and 5 named accused persons and two unknown persons, who were present there committed gang-rape on her and they also prepared a video thereof. The accused-persons used to commit rape on her by keeping her in fear that if she would not concede to their demand, they will make the video viral. She got pregnant twice due to rape committed on her by these accused persons. They also got her abortion. On 25.05.2019, Fukran Sir even asked her to handover her younger sister to them otherwise her video will be made viral. She refused his demand and consequently, on 02.06.2019, she got a courier in which video film and C.D. was kept. She got the video played and found that in said video C.D., accused Furkan Sir was committing rape on her. The informant is continuously being sexually exploited by accused persons and now they want to ruin the life of her younger sister also. The police investigated the case and recorded statement of the informant of the prosecutrix and other witnesses and filed a report of investigation under Section 153(2) Cr.P.C., wherein he concluded that the charge under Section 376D, 313, 328, 120B I.P.C. is made out against accused Fukran Sir son of Mukhtar Ahmad and Shivanand Bhatnagar but complicity of other named accused persons for said offences is not made out. During sessions trial statement of P.W.1 was recorded on 14.01.2020 and at the stage of cross-examination, she moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the named accused persons to face trial whose name was dropped during investigation.

4. The learned trial court after hearing the counsel for complainant and the learned ADGC(Criminal) considered the expediency of summoning the other accused-persons to face trial along with present accused persons under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and after considering evidence on record dismissed the application 11 B moved by de-facto complainant under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order, the prosecutrix filed present revision petition before this Court under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C.

5.