B.K. Sharma, J. - (1.) SRI Rama Shankar Shukla appears on behalf of Sri Krishnaji Khare, learned Counsel for the revisionist. Learned A.G.A. is present in person.
(2.) BY an order dated 15th March, 1982, the learned IVth Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ghazipur ordered for taking the cognizance by summoning the accused persons in Criminal Case No. 105 of 1982, Kamal Ahmad v. Pati Raj Sonkar and Ors., Under Section 465/466/467/468/120B, I.P.C. This order was challenged by Pati Raj Sonkar accused by filing a Criminal Revision No. 29 of 1982. This revision came up for hearing before Sri Y.R. Tripathi, the then IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Ghazipur who after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the materials on which the Court below has acted in issuing the processes Under Section 204, Code of Criminal Procedure, against the accused were not at all sufficient to satisfy the judicial discretion of the Court below, and that consequently the impugned order was not sustainable. Consequently, he allowed the revision and set aside the impugned order of the Court below and directed that the file of Kamal Ahmad v. Pati Raj Sonkar and Ors., Criminal Case No. 105 of 1982. be sent back to the Court below with the direction that it shall further hold an enquiry and after giving the complainant an opportunity to produce other evidence shall proceed further into the matter according to law, vide his judgment dated 15.9.1982. Against the aforesaid order, the complainant Kamal Ahmad preferred the present revision in the Court. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. and also gone through the materials on record. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has considered the facts and also legal position and there is no reason to differ from the view taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Consequently, this revision has no force and is accordingly dismissed.;