Court No. - 34
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 796 of 1993 Revisionist :- Ajay Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Sudhakar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.,K.Singh
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri Sudhakar Pandey, learned counsel for revisionist and learned A.G.A. for State of U.P.
2. This criminal revision under Section 401 read with Section 397 Cr.P.C. has been filed aggrieved by judgment and order dated 07.05.1992 passed by Assistant Session Judge, Ballia in Session Trial No.95 of 1987 (State vs. Omkar and others) whereby revisionist has been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. after perusal of statements of witnesses and order dated 28.4.1993 rejecting revisionist's application 73Kha, whereby he has requested the Court below to close the proceedings against him and also to discharge him.
3. It is contended by counsel for revisionist that there was no charge-sheet submitted against him and therefore, he was discharged on 12.02.1990. Thereafter, Trial Court has no jurisdiction to summon the revisionist.
4. Record shows that after the matter was committed to the Sessions Court and trial proceeded, on the basis of statements of witnesses, Trial Court examined the matter and thereafter passed order under Section 319 Cr.P.C., as is evident from order dated 07.05.1992 and at that stage, revisionist has submitted application for discharge. No other material was brought on record to be examined by Court below, hence application has been rejected.
5. Besides the fact that order impugned is interlocutory in nature, therefore, revision is not maintainanble, even otherwise, on merits also, I do not find any manifest error or otherwise illegality, procedural or otherwise, so as to justify interference in criminal revision.
6. Dismissed.
7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
8. Certify this judgment to the lower Court immediately.
Order Date :- 26.9.2019 KA