Smt. Sursati and Another vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kumar, J.—This revision has been filed against the order dated 23.1.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur, whereby he summoned the revisionists u/s 319, Cr. P.C. The Court recorded the statement of P.W. 1-Ikri and, thereafter also recorded the statements of two witnesses C.W. 2 and C.W. 3.

Learned Counsel for the revisionists contended that the witnesses are interested and there are many independent witnesses in this case. It is clear that the learned lower court not only examined the witnesses produced by the prosecution but also examined two other witnesses summoned by the Court itself. The learned lower court also discussed in detail the evidence. The contention of the learned Counsel for the revisionists is that there were many other independent witnesses to be examined before the Court prior to summoning of the revisionists is not convincing. If the learned lower court is convinced on the basis of the witness, already examined that a prima facie case is made out, it is not necessary for the Court to summon all the other witnesses for evidence before summoning the other accused persons. The carbon copy of the statement has been filed and it is clear that the witnesses were fully cross-examined. Again, there is no force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the revisionists that the evidence of witness was not concluded. The learned Counsel for the revisionists also placed reliance upon 2000 (2) JIC 5. However, in that case 49 witnesses have already been examined and three witnesses were to be further examined and, therefore, the order was set aside while in this case, so many other witnesses are to be examined and the revisionists have been examined on the initial stage of the proceedings.

Learned Counsel for the revisionists further contended that at the first instance, warrants have been issued. Learned lower court must have summoned the accused at the first instance. The order is, therefore, set aside on merit. However, in case, the revisionist appear before the Court themselves within 15 days of this order, no coercive measure shall be adopted against them.

With the aforesaid direction, the revision is disposed of.