HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1315 of 2024 Court No. - 90 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 6.2.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly, by which the revisionist has been summoned in Case Crime No. 260 of 2021, under Section 306 IPC on an application moved by opposite party no. 2 under Section 319 CrPC. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionists submits that initially six persons were nominated in the first information report. However, after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has dropped the name of two accused, i. e. revisionists herein, and four persons were chargesheeted and they are facing trial in the said case crime No. 260 of 2021. Learned counsel further submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye-witness in the present case and therefore, revisionists have been illegally summoned in the said case and thus, have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel also submits that the finding arrived at by learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly are not in accordance with law, as once the finding arrived at that not a prima facie case, but complete facts of the case are to be seen while summoning the prospective accused under Section 319 CrPC and prays that the order of summoning be set aside.. 4. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that the Additional Sessions Judge Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Bhaskar Bhadra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ajai Kumar, G.A., Vijay Kumar Verma Omkar And Another .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly, after going through the testimony of the P. W. 1 and P. W. 2 has rightly summoned the revisionists, as prospective accused and there is no infirmity, whatsoever, in the order of the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submits that apart from P. W. 1 and P. W. 2, other three witnesses of facts those have already been examined. However, the testimony of other three witnesses is not before this Court. Learned counsel also submits that the other witnesses have also deposed against the revisionists, hence impugned order calls for no interference by this Court. 5. Having regard to the rival contentions made by the parties and the fact that by the time present revision was filed, only two witnesses were examined and based on the testimony of two witnesses, the order of summoning under Section 319 CrPC has been passed. However, subsequently other three witnesses of fact have been examined, therefore, it would be appropriate, if the testimony of other three witnesses is also considered by Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly to reach an appropriate conclusion. Hence the order dated 6.2.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly is liable to be set aside and is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, E. C. Act, Bareilly for passing a fresh order taking into consideration the testimony of other three witnesses or any other witness, which has been concluded as on date. 6. Under the circumstances, the present revision is allowed. October 7, 2025 HR CRLR No. 1315 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad