S.C.AGARWAL, J. - (1.) AFFIDAVIT filed by the revisionists is taken on record. Heard learned Counsel for the revision­ists and learned AGA for the State. This revision is directed against the or­der dated 22.7.2010 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (Special) Baghpat in S.T. No. 602 of 2009, State v. Bhim and another, whereby the revisionists. Leelu S/o Omkar and Leelu S/o Ishwar were summoned under section 319 Cr. P.C. to face trial under section 302 read with sections 34 and 504 IPC.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the revision­ists submitted that the revisionists were named in the FIR. After investigation, it was found that the revisionists were not involved in the crime and therefore, no charge-sheet was submitted against them. During trial of the co-accused, an application was moved by the prosecution, under section 319 Cr. P.C. which was allowed by the Court on the basis of statements of Rajpal (P.W.-1) and Raj Singh (P.W.-2). It was submitted that evidence against the revi­sionists was not sufficient to prove their involvement in the crime. Learned AGA has supported the im­pugned order and submitted that the im­pugned order has been passed by learned Sessions Judge or the basis of evidence available on record and learned Trial Judge has also recorded his satisfaction that the evidence is of such a nature, which may be sufficient for conviction of the revisionists. A perusal of the statements of P.W.1 and P.W.-2 recorded before the Trial Court reveals that there is sufficient evidence against the revisionists to show their in­volvement in the crime. I entirely agree with the observa­tions made by learned Sessions Judge that evidence is of such a nature, if un-rebutted the same may be sufficient for conviction.
(3.) IN these circumstances, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. The revision lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed. However, if the revisionists surrender before the Court concerned within three weeks from today, their application be dis­posed of at the earliest by the Trial Court as the co-accused are already on bail.;