Amar Singh Chauhan, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
(2.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 01.06.2015 as well as to quash the entire criminal proceeding in S.T. No. 149/2011 (State vs. Varuna Kant @ Bhola and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 355/2010, under Sections 302, 364, 201, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Narki, District Firozabad, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Firozabad. It has further been prayed that the further proceeding of aforesaid case may be stayed.
(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the first information report was lodged by the informant Brijeshpal Singh that dead body of unknown person is lying nearby maize field of Bhawarpal Singh and the deceased was got identified as Sanjay Dhariya. The investigating officer after concluding the investigation submitted a charge sheet under Section 364, 302 I.P.C. against two persons namely Varuna Kant @ Bhola and Ajay Kumar. It is submitted that it is a circumstantial evidence and the chain of the circumstances which constitute the offence is not complete. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionists that the impugned order has been passed without recording any finding regarding its satisfaction to the effect that there is a likelihood of conviction of the revisionists. It is further submitted that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. should have exercised very sparingly and not in a routine manner but the impugned order lacks such requirement. Mere prima facie case is not sufficient to exercise the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. rather the evidence should be unrebuted would lead to the conviction of the person.;