Nisar Khan vs State of U.P. and Others

D.C. Srivastava, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and perused the impugned order.

The impugned order shows that on an application u/s 319. Code of Criminal Procedure, the C.J.M., Ghazipur summoned the revisionist Nisar Khan under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504 and 507, I.P.C. The impugned order further shows that the revisionist was named in the F.I.R. The witness who was interrogated by the Investigating Officer also nominated the revisionist as one of the accused. Still inspite of prima facie evidence, the Investigating Officer, for reasons not to be specified but the same is apparent intentionally did not submit charge-sheet against Nisar Khan. During the trial one witness. Iqbal Khan was examined and his cross-examination was completed on 1.3.1997. From his statement also, the nomination and participation of the revisionist in the occurrence was found. There was, thus, evidence against the revisionist, hence the summoning order u/s 319, Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be said to be illegal. There is no merit in the revision petition hence the same is hereby dismissed.