The court reiterated the application of Section 319 Cr.P.C. must rely on evidence recorded during trial, requiring more than a prima facie case for summoning additional accused.

JUDGMENT :

CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard Sri Phool Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Dev Raj Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 4.

2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 08.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Court No. 1, Kaushambi, in S.T. No. 74 of 2020 (State Vs. Manoj Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No. 01 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3 /4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mohabbatpur Painsa, District Kaushambi whereby the application under Section 3 19 Cr.P.C. filed by the revisionist has been rejected.

3. The brief facts of the case are that marriage of the daughter of the informant namely Radhika was solemnized with Manoj about five years ago according to Hindu Rites and Rituals and after marriage, husband Manoj, father-in-law Bhaiya Lal, mother-in-law and Dewar Ashok Kumar started demanding a buffalo and golden ring as additional dowry and harassing his daughter. Manoj had illicit relations with Sunita, sister-in-law. One month before the incident, Sunita and Manoj were called by the informant. On 07.01.2020 the husband and other in-laws hanged his daughter after killing her. The F.I.R. was registered as Case Crime No. 01 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3 /4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mohabbatpur Pairsa, District Kaushambi against husband Manoj, father-in-law Bhaiya Lal, mother-in-law and brother-in-law (Dewar) Ashok Kumar and Sunita Devi on the basis of tehrir given by the informant Man Singh. During investigation, statement of prosecution witnesses and other witnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet only against Manoj under Sections 498-A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3 /4 Dowry Prohibition Act. During trial, charges were framed against the accused Vinod. Thereafter, after recording statements of PW-1 and PW-2, accused-opposite party nos. 2 to 4 were summoned to face trial by the learned trial court vide impugned order dated 08.11.2024. Aggrieved against the said order, the present revision has been filed.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that marriage of the daughter of the informant namely Radhika was solemnized with Manoj about five years ago of the alleged incident, according to Hindu Rites and Rituals in which sufficient dowry was given but the husband and other in- laws were not satisfied with the dowry. After marriage, husband Manoj and his family members started demanding a buffalo and golden ring as additional dowry and harassing his daughter. Manoj had illicit relations with his sister-in-law, Sunita. On 07.01.2020 the husband and other family members killed her daughter. On receiving information, he came there and found that the dead body of the deceased was lying on the floor. The F.I.R. was registered as Case Crime No. 01 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3 /4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mohabbatpur Pairsa, District Kaushambi against husband Manoj, father-in-law Bhaiya Lal, mother-in-law, brother-in-law (Dewar) Ashok Kumar and Sunita Devi on the basis of tehrir given by the informant Man Singh. During investigation, statement of informant and other witnesses were recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and they supported the prosecution version. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitte