HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1276 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of revisionists in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. By way of present revision, the order dated 13.12.2023 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court no. 4, Bulandshahar in Session Trial No. 1803 of 2020 (State vs. Dinesh), arising out of Case Crime No. 487 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 307, 323, 506 I.P.C. and section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Gulawati, District-Bulandshahar is under challenge. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that during the course of trial, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was moved by the opposite parties to summon the revisionists, which has been allowed and the revisionists have been summoned to be a prospective accused in the ongoing session trial. He next submitted that the order passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court no. 4, Bulandshahar is totally based on incomplete evidence, as much as only two witnesses of fact those are likely to be examined, but not examined, however the exact status of witnesses is not yet known to the revisionist. 4. A perusal of the chargesheet, which has been filed along with present revision reveals that there are atleast 25 witnesses all in total, those are to be examined in ongoing session trial and about 8-10 witnesses of fact are yet to be examined and therefore, unless and until the relevant evidence is on record to summon the revisionists, then an order on application moved under Section 319 Cr.P.C. ought not to have been passed. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Arvind Kumar Singh, Brijesh Kumar Gautam, Rajesh Kumar, Shiv Vilas Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Kumar Singh, G.A. Akash Nephew And 4 Others .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that the order passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court no. 4, Bulandshahar though may be on the basis of the testimony of two witnesses is valid and in accordance with law, hence no interference is being called for in the order dated 13.12.2023. 6. Having regard to the rival contentions, the Court has come to the conclusion that merely because two witnesses of fact have been examined and yet there are 8-10 witnesses of fact remain to be examined, therefore, it would be appropriate that as and when the evidence of all the witnesses of fact is complete, the Court would be at liberty to pass an order on application under Section 319 Cr.P.C afresh. 7. Under such circumstances, the order dated 13.12.2023 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court no. 4, Bulandshahar suffers from manifest error and is hereby set aside. 8. The matter is remanded back to the concerned trial Court to pass such order as stated above at appropriate stage. 9. With the aforesaid observations, the instant revision is allowed. September 11, 2025 Faridul CRLR No. 1276 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad