- (1.) Heard Sri Imran Ibrahim holding brief of Sri Manish Tiwari, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Anand Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the opposite party no. 1.
(2.) This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the order dated 28.04.2012 passed by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 12 of 2011 (Case Crime No. 446 of 2008), under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Kasna, District Gautam Budh Nagar, whereby the revisionist has been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that a criminal revision no. 542 of 2012 was filed by the opposite party no.2 before this Court against the order dated 25.01.2012 passed by the learned VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Gautambudh Nagar, whereby the application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C., for summoning the revisionist under Section 306 I.P.C., was rejected. The said revision was disposed of by a detailed order dated 24.02.2012 with the direction to the Court below to consider the application of the prosecution after adducing of the evidence by the complainant, thereafter, the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., be decided, copy of order dated 24.02.2012 is annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit accompanying the revision. It is further submitted that after passing of the order dated 24.02.2012, summoning order has been passed whereby the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., has been allowed. Learned counsel for the revisionist further contends that a bare reading of the statements of P.W.2 and 3 as well as copy of the suicide note would go to show that no offence under Section 306 I.P.C., is made out against the revisionist, who is the wife of the deceased. It is thus contended that summoning of the revisionist under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is bad in law.;