Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1870 of 1993 Revisionist :- Sobram Singh Opposite Party :- State Counsel for Revisionist :- S.K. Lakhotakia Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
List revised. No one is present on behalf of the revisionist. Heard learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned A.G.A. submits that revision has been filed against the summoning order dated 27.7.1991 by which revisionist and three others were summoned for the offence under Section 498A IPC and summoning order has not been challenged by father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the O.P. No.2 and has been challenged only by the revisionist who happens to Mamia Sasur of O.P. No.2.
Upon hearing learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, I find that in the complaint under Section 498A, 504, 506 IPC no specific role have been assigned to revisionist who has been arrayed as O.P. No.5 in the complaint.
It is also pertinent to mention that the O.P. Nos. 1,2 and 3, father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of O.P. No.2 are resident of Mohalla Shastri Nagar, P.S. Hari Parvat, District Agra while revisionist is resident of Village Billochpura, P.S. Lohamandi, District Agra.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case, material available on record and the tendency of false implication of all family members in such offences by general allegations, as pointed by the Apex Court in the Geeta Mehrotra case as well as in absence of any specific role assigned to revisionist since he was not residing with the other accused and O.P. No.2, allegation of committing cruelty or demanding dowry by revisionist does not appear correct. It is also pertinent to mention that father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of O.P. No.2 have not joined as revisionist in the present revision.
In view of above, I find that learned Magistrate has acted wrongly and illegally in summoning revisionist, the Mamia Sasur of O.P. No.2 for the offence under Section 498A IPC and the impugned order summoning him is liable to be set aside.
The revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 27.7.1991 summoning the revisionist for the offence under Section 498A IPC is set aside only in respect of revisionist and it will not adversely affect the order in respect of other co-accused persons.
The revision is disposed of accordingly.
Let a copy of this order be sent to court below for necessary compliance, if any.
Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 24.3.2018
AK Pandey