K.N.Ojha, J. - (1.) Instant revision has been preferred against order dated 29.9.1984 passed by learned Special Judge (Economic Offences), Allahabad, whereby Criminal Appeal No. 137 of 1983, Shyam Sunder Singh and two Ors. v. State of U.P. was allowed and conviction of Shyam Sunder Singh, Ashok Singh and Santosh Kumar Singh alias Haider under Sections 325, 324, 323 I.P.C. was set aside and the case was remanded for fresh decision with a direction that evidence existing on record would be treated as valid and admissible. However, if any party wants to lead any fresh evidence, he should be given opportunity for the same and if the prosecution leads any evidence the accused would be re-examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. and an opportunity to lead evidence in defence would be given and thereafter the case would be decided on merit after hearing the parties. Impugned order dated 20.9.1984 was passed by learned Special Judge (Economic Offences), Allahabad against order of conviction and sentence dated 18.8.1983 passed by Judicial Magistrate IV, Allahabad, in Criminal Case No. 666 of 1980, State v. Shyam Sunder Singh and two others.
(2.) The facts of the case as revealed from the record is that one Sampat Singh of village Govindpur, police station Sarai Aqil, district Allahabad, was ploughing his filed on 10.6.1980 at 4.30 P.M. when the revisionists Shyam Sunder Singh, Ashok Singh and Santosh Kumar @ Haider went there and assaulted Sampat. His son Mathura went to his rescue, but he was also injured. It is said that Shyam' Sunder and Ashok were armed with Lathi and Santosh Kumar @ Haidar was armed with Pharsa. The witnesses Mahadeo, Tirath and Sheo Adhar Singh of village Govindpur intervened and later on Sampat Singh lodged FIR on the same day at 8.00 P.M. by name against the revisionist. After investigation charge sheet was submitted against them.
(3.) Revisionists pleaded not guilty. A counter version was set up by Shyam Sunder Singh in his statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. that incident had taken place at his house when he was assaulted by Sampat and his associates. He also claimed that plot in dispute was owned by him.;