Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2424 of 2018 Revisionist :- Sanjay Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Kedar Nath Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State.
Present revision has been filed against the order dated 05.6.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Court no.27, Deoria, by which the revisionists have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for the offence alleged in S.T. No. 09 of 2016 (State Vs. Rakesh and others) under Sections 363,366, 376-D IPC, P.S. Khampar, District Deoria.
Learned counsel for revisionist submits that revisionist was neither named in the FIR nor the police found any material against him.
In fact it is stated that at the time of occurrence of the incident, revisionist was lying admitted at medical establishment at Lucknow. It is stated that proof of such admission of the revisionist at medical establishment had been brought on record during the investigation.
Sri Bikash Kumar Mishra, Advocate who appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 submits that plea of alibi has been set up by the revisionist on the basis of some document of the private medical establishment which may require further evidence before the same can be accepted.
So far as the revisionist is concerned, he had not been named in the FIR. It has been stated that FIR had been lodged by the father of the prosecutrix while she was missing. However, at the stage of recording of statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has specifically named the revisionist and assigned specific role to him.
The prayer for quashing the impugned order is refused.
However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the revisionist appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his 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, this criminal revision is finally
disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2018 Meenu