Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1625 of 2021
Revisionist :- Neha Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Shahenshah Akhtar Khan
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri S.A. Khan, learned counsel for the revisionist- Neha Yadav and Sri Vikas Goswami, learned AGA for the State.
2. This Criminal Revision has been filed by the complainant- Neha Yadav being aggrieved of order dated 02.01.2020 passed in Complaint Case No.9667 of 2020 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra on the ground that learned CJM has only summoned husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant vide impugned order, but has not summoned one Sukhdev Yadav, 'Chachiya Sasur' of the complainant and another Ajay Yadav, 'Nandoi' of the complainant, though in statements under Section 202 Cr.P.C., their names have been taken by the father and mother of the complainant.
3. Learned AGA, in his turn, submits that complainant-Neha Yadav has given her statements under Section 200 Cr.P.C,. which were recorded on 18.11.2020.
4. Reading such statements, it is pointed out that there is no specific allegation against the persons, namely, Sukhdev Yadav and Ajay Yadav. It is further submitted that the statements of father and mother of the complainant are based on hearsay evidence, and they have taken names, Sukhdev Yadava and Ajay Yadav in an omnibus manner and no specific role has been assigned to them.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, I am of the opinion that in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in case of Rashmi Chopra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another; 2019 (4) ALJ 344 and Geeta Mehrotra and another Vs. State of U.P.; 2012 (10) SCC 741, learned Magistrate has at this stage rightly not summoned the alleged accused persons, namely, Sukhdev Yadav and Ajay Yadav, and they have rightly not been summoned because prima facie Magistrate has to only record his satisfaction, as to the availability of some material, which may form basis for taking cognizance of the offences against the alleged accused persons.
6. In the light of the discussion made above, it is apparent that complainant has not made any specific allegations against Sukhdev Yadav & Ajay Yadav and, therefore, the order impugned cannot be faulted with. Criminal Revision fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 Ashutosh
Digitally signed by Justice Vivek Agarwal Date: 2021.07.29 11:15:04 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad