- (1.) The instant revision is directed against the order dated 2.7.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Bikaner in Sessions Case No.57/2016 whereby, the learned trial Judge accepted the application filed by the respondent No.2 complainant under Section 193 I.P.C. and directed summoning of the petitioners as additional accused in the case to face trial with the charge-sheeted accused.
(2.) Facts in brief are that the respondent No.2 filed an F.I.R. at the P.S. Bajju on 28.4.2014 alleging inter-alia that the petitioners alongwith the charge-sheeted accused Keshara Ram, Dharampal, Shrawan, Khetpal, Meera and Rameshwari assaulted the first informant's uncle's son Bhinya Ram, Arjun Ram and aunt Meera while they were working in their fields, with dangerous weapons and caused them innumerable injuries. The Investigating Officer, after concluding investigation, filed a charge-sheet only against Keshara Ram, Dharampal, Shrawan and Khetpal and the present petitioners who were named in the F.I.R. were left out from the array of accused. The Investigating Officer filed a charge-sheet against the above named four male assailants in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kolayat on 26.11.2014 and on the very same day, the trial court took cognizance against those accused persons for the offence under Section 307, 341, 323, 324, 325 and 326 read with 34 I.P.C . and committed the case to the court of the Sessions Judge concerned for trial. Admittedly, the complainant had not been intimated of the partial charge-sheet and thus, no sooner the case was received in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, he moved an application under Section 193 Cr.P.C. in that court with a prayer for summoning the petitioners whosenames had been left out by the Police from the list of charge-sheeted accused. The accused petitioners have approached this Court by way of the instant revision to challenge the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while exercising powers under Section 193 Cr.P.C.
(3.) Shri R.S.Choudhary, learned counsel representing the petitioners vehemently urged that the implication of these two ladies as additional accused in the case, is absolutely unwarranted and unjustified. The Investigating Officer, assigned detailed and cogent reasons for excluding the names of the petitioners from the array of accused. The learned Magistrate had taken active cognizance of the offences against the charge-sheeted accused and as such, Shri Choudhary by referring to this Court's judgment in the case of Shodan Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2017(2) RLW 1565 (Raj.) urged that the impugned order is bad in the eye of law and cannot be sustained.;