- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA and perused the records.
(2.) Applicant had filed complaint case no. 862 pf 2014 in which summoning order dated 18.07.2013 was passed, against which revision no. 717 of 2013 was filed, thereafter revisional court found that order of summoning was defecting because available evidences were not properly perused and considered. Therefore by judgement dated 27.05.2014, revision was allowed and matter was remanded to trial court for proper perusal of evidences and record and for passing appropriate order on merit. Thereafter learned Magistrate had again heard counsel for the complainant / applicant and passed summoning order dated 28.06.2014. This order was again challenged in criminal revision no. 565 of 2014. By judgement dated 17.03.2016 Additional Sessions Court No.2, Aligarh had allowed the revision and remanded the matter again to trial court with direction to properly peruse and appreciate evidences and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance with law. This impugned order dated 17.03.2016 has been challenged in present application.
(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that in earlier summoning order magistrate had summoned accused persons for four offences including u/s 457 IPC. But in latter summoning order dated 28.06.2014 accused were not summoned for offence under Section 457 of IPC which indicates that proper order has been passed after appreciation of evidences.;