RADHESHYAM Vs. STATE OF M.P. AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 11.5.2018 passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge Morena in Criminal Case No.84/2018 taking cognizance against the petitioner Radheshyam under section 193 of Cr.P.C., 1973 and has issued notices for appearance of the petitioner.

(2.) It is the complainant's case that Crime No.246 of 2017 was registered under the provisions of Section 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 294, 506 of IPC and later on Section 307 of IPC has been added, wherein the allegation was against the accused persons including the present petitioner that armed with lathi, farsa, sabbal and Fawda they had attacked Raju, who had received injuries of Farsa and when his daughter-in-law Neelam and son Kapil tried to save them, then Laxman, Sudama, Pradeep had beaten them and caused injuries with farsa, lathi and handle of an axe but despite there being a named FIR, police did not find involvement of the present petitioner, though his name is mentioned in the statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C., 1973

(3.) It is the contention of the complainant that police authorities gave benefit to the present petitioner as he is a government employee and on the basis of such evidence his name has been excluded, therefore, cognizance be taken under the provisions of section 190(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., 1973 and he be called for through arrest warrant.