Vijay Lakshmi, J. - (1.) This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 31.10.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Jhansi, in S. T. No. 269 of 2016, State Vs. Amit Awasthi, u/s 304, 201 I.P.C., P.S. Babina, District Jhansi, whereby the revisionists have been summoned u/s 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial.
(2.) Heard Mr. V. P. Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Vikram Singh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned AGA for the State. Perused the record.
(3.) It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionists that although the F.I.R. in this case was lodged by the widow of the deceased against four named accused persons u/s 302, 201, 394/34 I.P.C., however, the police after investigation, submitted charge sheet only against one accused Amit Awathi u/s 304 and 201 I.P.C. and submitted final report against the rest three i.e. the present revisionists because the Investigating officer found nothing incriminating against the revisionists. However, in the trial court, when the widow of the deceased Smt. Saroj Solanki was examined as PW1 and she made specific allegations against the revisionists, an application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. was moved by the prosecution on 16.9.2017 with prayer to summon the revisionists to face trial along with chargesheeted accused and the learned trial court without looking properly into the material on record and without application of mind, allowed that application. Learned counsel for the revisionists has further contended that the revisionists have absolutely no role in the alleged murder of the deceased, all of them are innocent and it was due to this reason that they were not charge sheeted but the court below, by the impugned order, has wrongly summoned them, therefore, impugned order be set aside and the revision be allowed.;