HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5135 of 2024 Court No. - 90 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the state, Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 and perused the material on record. 2. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Jhansi, in Sessions Trial No. 63 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 0031 of 2019, under Sections 147, 306 IPC, Police Station Badagaon, District Jhansi, by which the application moved by the revisionist under section 319 Cr.P.C for summoning the prospective accused persons has been dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the learned trial court has passed the said order in a cursory manner and did not consider the valuable evidence of 2, witnesses particularly PW-1 and PW-2, which was available on record and submits that even on the basis of 2 witnesses, there was sufficient material to summon the accused persons. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that the order dated 31.07.2024 is based on the charge-sheet alone, wherein the learned trial court has arrived at the conclusion, that the Investigating Officer, while submitted the charge sheet has dropped the name of prospective accused persons namely Chandrapal son of Santosh Rajpoot, Santosh Rajpoot son of Kamta Prasad Rajpoot, Smt. Bhuri wife of Santosh Rajpoot and Smt. Nisha wife of Pradeep Kumar and did not consider the testimony of PW-1 and PW-2 and prayed that the present revision be allowed. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 has Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Shiv Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Amit Daga, G.A. Keshab Singh .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) submitted that the learned trial court after going into the entire facts and material on record, particularly the charge-sheet and the testimony of PW-1 and PW-2 has arrived at the findings and passed the said order, which calls for no interference by this Court. Learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 has further submitted that, even the 2 witnesses particular PW-1 and PW-2 did not fully support the case of prosecution to the extent that the prospective accused persons, opposite parties nos. 2 to 5 herein this revision, were liable to be summoned. Learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5 has next submitted that, even the PW-1 and PW-2 those have been examined in the trial are not the eye witnesses and, therefore, even if, reliance is made upon the testimony 2 witnesses, no cogent and concrete material is valuable to summon the prospective accused persons and he further prayed that the present revision is liable to be dismissed. 5. Having considering the rival contentions and the fact that, the learned trial court has arrived at the findings based on the charge-sheet, wherein the learned trial court in the last operating paragraph stated that the prospective accused persons were dropped in the charge-sheet and the said charge-sheet was field against one accused only. Moreover, there are other witnesses those may throw the light upon the involvement or complicity of the prospective accused person, particularly the Doctor witness who has conducted the postmortem and the viscera of the deceased has been preserved, hence, it is directed that, while recording the evidence during the course of trial the testimony of PW-6 i.e. Doctor K.K Jain, PW-7 Sudama Prasad, PW-12 Smt. Shanti, PW-14 Beni Prasad and PW-17 Smt. Harkunwar is completed, then the complainant/informant/revisionist will have another opportunity and the trial Court will have sufficient material/evidence on record, as to whether the prospective accused can be summoned or otherwise. In the given fact and circumstance of the case, the order dated 31.07.2024 is set aside with the liberty that as when occasion arises, the revisionist shall take up the matter before the concerned trial court by way of appropriate proceedings. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the present revision stands disposed of. October 10, 2025 Vikram CRLR No. 5135 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad