VIJAY LAKSHMI,J. - (1.) AS both these revisions have been preferred against the same order, pertaining to same Crime No. and cause of action, both are being disposed of by this common judgment. The revisionists of both the revisions are husband and wife, both of whom have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. by the order impugned.
(2.) BY Revision No.2116 of 2007 (Smt. Avinash vs. State of U.P.& anr), the revisionist Smt. Avinash has challenged the order dated 4.7.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Bijnor, whereas the revisionist Dharamvir by Revision No.2180 of 2007, apart from the aforesaid order dated 4.7.2007, has challenged one more order dated 11.6.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Bijnor, whereby the learned Court has allowed the application moved by prosecution under section 311 Cr.P.C. Some brief facts relevant for disposal of these revisions are that on 30.4.2005, the complainant Kunwar Sen lodged an FIR against the revisionist Dharamvir, his wife Smt. Avinash and two brothers of Dharamvir, namely Ram Autar and Naresh Kumar, mentioning therein that the accused persons are his cousin brothers. The complainant's son Gaurav had enticed away the wife of accused Ram Autar on 15.4.2005. Due to this enmity, the accused persons on 27.4.2005 took away the wife of complainant Smt. Kanta Devi with them. Karan Singh and his wife Krishna Devi, who lived in the same colony had seen them taking away Kanta Devi. The complainant and his family members searched for Kanta Devi but she could not be traced out. In the early morning of 30.4.2005 at about 5 :00 a.m. when Ram Autar, Naresh, Dharamvir and his wife Smt. Avinash were taking away the dead body of Kanta Devi in order to disposed it off, the son of complainant, Anurag and two other residents of vicinity, Arun Kumar, and Mahendra Singh noticed them. Having seen the son of complainant and the neighbours, the accused persons threw away the dead body of Kanta Devi in front of the house of Prakash Saini and ran away.
(3.) THE case was registered and the matter was investigated. After concluding the investigation, the police submitted charge sheet only against two persons i.e. Ram Autar and Naresh Kumar Dharamvir and his wife Smt. Avinash were exonerated by the police. The trial proceeded against Ram Autar and Naresh Kumar. The complainant, his son Anurag and the eye witnesses named in the FIR were examined by the prosecution but all of them turned hostile. On 1.6.2007, the complainant moved an application under section 311 Cr.P.C. to the effect that his son Gaurav was in custody of the accused persons, who after informing him that Gaurav is alive, assured him to hand over his son, in case he turns hostile in the court. On their assurance, the complainant, his son and his witnesses turned hostile while deposing in the court but even after expiry of considerable time after their deposition, the accused persons have not returned his son Gaurav to him. The complainant under these circumstances, intends to be re -examined so that truth may be brought to the notice of the court. The aforesaid application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was allowed by the court and the complainant Kunwar Sen P.W.1 and his son Anurag P.W. -2 were recalled. After being recalled when both these witnesses were re -examined, they fully supported the prosecution case and the story narrated in the FIR, naming both the revisionists, as active participants in the crime.;