- (1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A. and perused the order.
(2.) THIS revision has been directed against the order dated 6-6-2001 passed by Special Judge, (E. C. Act)/additional Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, in Special Trial No. 3 of 1998 summoning the applicant as an accused for trial along with co-accused under Section 319 Cr. P. C. It appears that on 5-6-1997 Sub-Inspector Ram Bahadur Singh, the then Station Officer of P. S. Barnahal, district Mainpuri, got information that kerosene oil was being taken unauthorisedly for selling in black market. Believing on above information, he laid ambush at Dehuli crossing along with other police officers. Metador No. UP 80/e-9555 was seen coming from the side of Karhal. The above Metador was intercepted and on checking two drums of kerosene oil were found on it. The Driver of the Metador namely Tilak Singh co-accused, was apprehended on the spot. Another person, whose name was disclosed, as Pappu was also sitting on the Metador, but he ran away. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against Tilak Singh alone. During trial Constable Ramji Lal (P. W. 1) was examined by the prosecution. He stated in his evidence that Tilak Singh was driving Metador and another person named Pappu was also sitting on Metador. In his cross-examination he stated that Pappu might be owner of kerosene oil. On the basis of above evidence the prosecution moved an application for summoning the applicant under Section 319 Cr. P. C. on the ground that he was also involved in the offence. The learned Special Judge on considering the evidence of Ramji Lal (P. W. 1) held that prima facie a case was also made out against Pappu applicant. Accordingly, he summoned him under Section 319 Cr. P. C. for trial along with other accused by the impugned order.
(3.) IT was contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that for summoning any person as an accused under Section 319 Cr. P. C. there must be some evidence, by which it should appear that the accused has committed any offence for which he could be tried together with the other accused. But in this case there is no such evidence implicate the applicant, as the only evidence against the applicant was that he was sitting on Metador and ran away. By sitting on the Metador, the applicant cannot be said to have committed any offence. That unless it is shown that he had some concerned with the recovered kerosene oil, he cannot be said to have committed an offence under Sections 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act. Having considered the statement of Ram Ji Lal (P. W. 1) I agree with the learned Counsel for the applicant that at this stage there was no evidence against the applicant to show that a prima facie case was made out against him. The only evidence against him was that he was sitting on Metador and ran away. On cross-examination the applicant did not state that he was owner of recovered kerosene oil and he simply stated that applicant might be owner of the kerosene oil. As such on such evidence the applicant could not be summoned under Section 319 Cr. P. C.;