VIRENDRA KUMAR DIXIT,J. - (1.) HEARD Shri M.G.Tripathi learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi learned Additional Government Advocate for opposite party no. 1. Perused relevant documents on record. Issuance of notice to opposite party no. 2 is dispensed with.
(2.) BY the instant petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 28.3.2009 passed by the learned Judge in Session Trial No. 70/2005 arising out of Case Crime No. 38/2001 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3(i) (X) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat Balrampur, District Balrampur pending before the court of Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Balrampur. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that only on the basis of statement of complainant opposite party no. 2, who was examined as PW-1, the impugned order has been passed by the learned trial court. That the comprehensive perusal which is condition precedent for an appropriate order under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is that the accusation indicated against the persons must be based upon reliable and reasonable evidence but the learned trial court summoned the petitioner on the basis of contradictory, doubtful, unreliable and inimical evidence given by partition witness PW-1, Smt. Sulochna Devi.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Michael Machado and another Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2000) 3 SCC 262.;