Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 488 of 2018
Revisionist :- Manik Chand And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Virendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 1 of 2018 Delay in filing the present criminal revision is sufficiently explained. Delay is condoned. Delay condonation application is allowed.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present criminal revision has been filed to quash the order dated 23.01.2018 passed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. by the Addl. Session Judge/E.C. Act, Allahabad in Session Trial No. 940 of 2015 (State Vs. Shiv Shankar), by which the applicants were summoned under Sections- 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Sarai Mamrej, District- Allahabad.
At present, it appears that the applicants have been summoned on the statement of PW-1/informant who is the brother of the deceased. He has specifically testified that the deceased before her death informed him that the applicants also had caused burn injuries by pouring oil and setting fire. At present, no interference is warranted, at this stage.
However, all the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para- 10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid directions, the present criminal revision is disposed of. Order Date :- 31.7.2018 Abhilash