- (1.) SURENDRA Singh, J. Aggrieved by the order dated 10. 4. 2008 passed by ACJM Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi), in case No. 209 of 2008, the revi3ionist preferred a revision which was numbered as 54 of 2008, before the Sessions Judge, Bhadohi which was also dismissed by the revisional Court by order dated 23. 6. 2008. Thus, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA and have also perused the entire materials placed on record. Notices to respondent Nos. 2 to 8 are not required to be sent as no adverse order has been passed against them by the Courts below. Encapsulated facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the gom-plainant, Sanjai Kumar Chaurasiya (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) on 24. 1. 2008 in the Court of ACJM Bhadohi, at Gyanpur against the opposite party Nos. 2 to 8 which was registered as criminal case No. 209, of 2008. It was alleged in the complaint that despite the order of the status quo passed by the Hon'ble High Court, on 16. 12 2007 at about 6. 30 p. m. , the opposite party Nos. 2 to-8 with the common intention came on the bhumidhari land of the petitioner having armed with motley weapons such as axe, lathi, danda etc. started cutting the trees and bushes and when the petitioner stopped them from doing so, on the instigation of the opposite party Nn 2, ali of them entered into the house of the petitioner and caused injuries with lathi, danda, kicks and fists and thereupon when the mother of the petitioner and brother, Munna Lal and Ajai Kumar came for his rescue, they too were as "he opposite party No. 2, Hari Shanker there after, fired with his country made pistol causing panie terror in the family. It has been further alleged that soon after, the father of the petitioner also arrived there and he was also beaten by Suresh, Mahesh, Ajit and Awadesh Kumar and a sum of Rs. 70001- (a day's sale amount) was snatched from his pocket and co-accused Algoo, thereafter, attacked upon his father with knife albeit, he was saved unhurt. It has further been alleged that co-accused Kamla Devi and Sarita Devi opposite party Nos. 4 and 7 with the connivance of rest of the accused persons destroyed the furniture and other domestic articles of the house causing huge monetary loss to the petitioner. It has also been alleged that opposite party No. 8, Algoo made an assault upon the petitioner causing head injury by the butt of the knife and snatched his golden chain. In support of the complaint, the petitioner got himself examined under Section 200, Cr. P. C. on 24. 1. 2008 and thereafter, the statement of Indrajit (PW-1), Raj Kumar (PW-2), Jagdish Kumar Chaurasiya (PW-3), Sushila (PW-4), Ghanshyam (PW-5) and Dr. K. S, Rai (PW-6) was recorded under Section 202, Cr. P. C. After hearing the Counsel for the complainant, learned ACJM vice his impugned order dated 10. 4. 2008 dismissed the complaint holding that theallega-tions made in complaint and in the statement of the witnesses are wholly im-proper and are not supported by the documentary evidence. Thus, the ground to summon the accused persons/the opposite parties are not sufficient.
(3.) IT was contended by the learned Counsel for the revisionist that learned ACJM has committed gross illegality in making detail assessment of the evidence and dismissing the complaint on the basis of non- production of the docu mentary evidence in support of the allegations made, as well as the improbability of the allegations contained therein. It has also been contended that at the stage of Section 202, Cr. P. C. only prima facie case to proceed against the accused persons is to be seen and the evidence led by the complainant is not to be assessed with a view of possibility of the conviction of the accused likely to be summoned.;