Allahabad High Court High Court

Vimla Devi & Others vs State Of U.P. & Another on 3 August, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Vimla Devi & Others vs State Of U.P. & Another on 3 August, 2010
Court No. - 50

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2932 of 2010

Petitioner :- Vimla Devi & Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Rakesh Kumar Mathur,Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble S.C. Agarwal,J.

Memo of appearance filed by Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh on behalf of respondent no.
2 is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned AGA for the State and learned
counsel for the complainant.

This revision is directed against the order dated 17.7.2010 passed by the Addl.
Sessions Judge (F.T.C. No. 5), Jaunpur in S.T. No. 69 of 2009, State Vs. Saligram &
others, whereby on the application 19-Kha of prosecution, revisionists were
summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial under Sections 498A, 304B IPC
and 3/4 D.P. Act.

Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that learned trial court had
summoned the revisionists on the ground that there was sufficient evidence to reveal
prima- facie involment of revisionists having committed offence under Sections 498A,
304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. Learned counsel contends that learned trial court has not
recorded his satisfaction that the evidence is of such a nature that their exists a
possibility that the accused so summoned, in all likelihood, would be convicted.
In Mohd. Shafi Vs. Mohd. Rafiq and another, 2007 (58) ACC 254, the Apex
Court had held that before a Court exercising its discretionary jurisdiction in terms of
Section 319 Cr.P.C., it must arrive at the satisfaction that there exists a possibility
that the accused so summoned is in all likelihood liable to be convicted.
Since learned trial court has not recorded his satisfaction as above, the impugned
order cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside.
The criminal revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 17.7.2010 passed
by the leaned Addl. Sessions Judge is set aside with a direction to decide the
application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. moved by the prosecution afresh in
accordance with the direction of the Apex Court in case of Mohd. Shafi (supra).
Order Date :- 3.8.2010
KU