- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned AGA.
(2.) By means of the instant revisionist, the revisionists are assailing the veracity and validity of summoning order dated 29.01.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge, Firozabad under section 319 Cr.P.C. whereby the court concerned has summoned the revisionists to face trial for the offence under sections 304 and 342 IPC in S.T. No. 128 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 208 of 2017 (State v. Babloo and others), P.s. Matsena, District Firozabad.
(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that the names of the revisionists, though named in the FIR but during investigation their names were found to be falsely implicated, resultantly, names of the present revisionists were dropped and charge sheet was submitted against Babloo, Sunny alias Bunty and Kallu only. Thereafter the case was committed to the court of sessions, where statements of P.W.- 1 Manju and P.W.- 2 Kamlesh were recorded, who took the names of the present revisionists- Machchar alias Mangla and Smt. Afsana Begum in commission of the crime whereupon the prosecution filed application under section 319 Cr.P.C., which was admitted by the court concerned the present revisionists were summoned to face trial for the offence under sections 304 and 342 IPC and fixed date of appearance on 07.02.2019 vide order dated 29.01.2019. To buttress his submissions, learned counsel for the revisionists has relied upon the principles of law enunciated in the case of Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab and others[2019 LawSuit(SC) 818], Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Others, (2014) 3 SCC 92, Labhuji Amratji Thakor and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ANR passed in Criminal Appeal No.1349 of 2018 arising out of SLP (CRL.) No.6392 /2018 Amrutbhai Shambhubahi Patel v. Sumanbhai Kantibhai Patel and others [2017 4 SCC 177] and Pariyasami and others v. S. Nallasamy [2019 LawSuit (SC) 790].;