- (1.) This petition has been filed by the complainant-petitioner under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (Cr.P.C. for short), challenging the order dated 19.5.2009 passed by the trial Court, whereby the application filed by the State under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning respondents No.2 to 4 as additional accused was dismissed.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the deceased had suffered a dying declaration. As per the said declaration, respondents No.2 to 4 had also sprinkled kerosene oil on her along with their co-accused and had set her on fire. The trial Court has proceeded to disbelieve the dying declaration of the deceased in this regard while passing the impugned order as if the trial was being decided after the conclusion of entire evidence. At this stage, the trial Court was merely required to see as to whether respondents No.2 to 4 were also liable to face the trial on the basis of material available on record during trial.
(3.) Learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. moved by the prosecution had been rightly dismissed by the trial Court. The reasons given by the trial Court, while dismissing the application, were sound reasons. The trial Court has rightly held that that statement of the deceased was a tutored one as her family members were present with her before recording of her statement. Respondents No.2 to 4 were the married sisters-in-law of the deceased and had no occasion to be present at the spot, at the same time and participate in the alleged crime.;