1

Reserved On: 22.7.2022

Delivered On: 1.8.2022

Court No. - 80

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2415 of 2012

Revisionist :- Suresh

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Revisionist :- Sumit Goyal

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Sunil Kumar

Srivastava

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

1.

Heard Mr. Sumit Goyal, the learned counsel for revisionist and

learned A.G.A. for State. No one appears on behalf of first

informant/opposite party-2 to oppose this revision even though name of

Mr. Sunil Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, is duly published in the cause list.

2.

Perused the record.

3.

This criminal revision has been filed challenging order dated

23.7.2012, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Ex Cadre No.1 in

Sessions Trial No. 622 of 2009 (State Vs. Omprakash and Others), under

section 323/34, 324/34, 307/34, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (1)(10) SC and ST

Act, Police Station-Rampur District-Saharanpur, whereby application

under section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the first informant-opposite party-2 has

been allowed and simultaneously revisionist has been summoned by

Court below to face trial in aforementioned Sessions Trial.

4.

Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have

occurred on 13.5.2008, at 10:00 pm, first informant/opposite party-2

Ramkumar lodged an F.I.R. dated 15.5.2008, which was registered as

Case Crime No. 151 of 2009, under sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 504,

506, Police Station- Rampur, District Saharanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R.

2

five persons namely, Sethpal, Om Prakash, Binder, Janak and Akshay

have been nominated as named accused, whereas two unknown persons

have also been arraigned as accused.

5.

The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is that named

accused along with unknown persons on the fateful day assaulted Raj

Kumar and Meghraj on account of which they sustained fire arm injuries.

6. After lodging of aforementioned F.I.R., Investigating Officer proceeded

with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of

Chapter XII Cr.P.C. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer

examined Raj Kumar (injured), Meghraj Singh (injured) Ram Kumar

(first informant) and other witnesses in terms of Section 161 Cr.P.C. On

the basis of above and other material collected by Investigating Officer

during course of investigation, he came to the conclusion that complicity

of only four of the named accused i.e., Om Prakash, Binder, Janak and

Akshay is established in the crime in question. Accordingly, Investigating

Officer submitted the charge-sheet dated 22.11.2008, whereby Om

Prakash, Binder, Janak and Akshay have been charge sheeted, whereas

one of the named accused namely, Om Prakash was exculpated.

7.

After submission of aforesaid charge sheet, cognizance was taken

upon same by concerned Magistrate. As the case is exclusively triable by

Court of Sessions, concerned Magistrate committed the case to the Court

of Sessions. Consequently, Sessions Trial No. 622 of 2009 (State Vs.

Omprakash and Others), under section 323/34, 324/34, 307/34, 504, 506

IPC and 3 (1)(10) SC and ST Act, Police Station-Rampur District-

Saharanpur came to be registered. The trial Judge, charged the charge-

sheeted accused for crime under different sections of IPC which was

denied by charge sheeted accused, and they claimed to be tried. Hence to

bring home the guilt of charge sheeted accused successfully, trial

procedure commenced. During course of trial, the prosecution adduced

P.W.1- Meghraj Singh and P.W.2 Manoj Kumar.

3

8.

At this juncture, first informant/opposite party-2 filed an application

under section 319 Cr.P.C. praying therein that revisionist be also

summoned to face trial in aforementioned sessions trial. Same was

allowed by Court below vide order dated 2.11.2010.

9.

Feeling aggrieved by order dated 2.11.2010, passed by Court below,

revis