- (1.) A. K. Roopanwal, J. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 4-9-2004 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti in case No. 7322/2003, Ram Hit Singh and Ors. v. Arun Singh and Ors. , under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201, 323, IPC and 3/4 D. P. Act, P. S. Parashurampur, District Basti and order dated 26-5-2007 passed by Special Judge, E. C. Act, Basti in Criminal Revision No. 427/2004.
(2.) IT appears from the record that in the aforesaid case final report was submitted. Against this final report protest petition was filed and after considering the statements of the complainant as well as his witnesses summoning order was passed. This summoning order dated 4-9-2004 was challenged in Revision No. 427/04. The Sessions Judge partially allowed the revision, set aside the order dated 4-9- 2004 and remanded the case back to the CJM for afresh decision in the light of the observations made in the body of the revisional judgment. The petitioners are not satisfied with the order passed in the revision, hence, they have come up in the writ petition. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and gone through the record. The main apprehension of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that in the garb of the order passed by the Sessions Judge in revisional jurisdiction the CJM will consider the statements of the complainant and the witnesses only and would not consider the whole material on record. I feel that this apprehension is baseless. However, in order to impart equity in the case, I finally dispose of this writ petition with the direction that while disposing of the matter before it, the CJM concerned will take into account all the material available in the case diary as well as the material produced before him by the complainant. Petition disposed of. .;