HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3741 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present revision has been filed agaisnt the order dated 10.04.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur by which the revisionist had been summoned pursuant to the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that in the present case the victim was married to one Anil Chauhan and thereafter, she left her matrimonial house and she was reportedly taken away by one Amit Chauhan, who belongs to the same village. It is stated that the victim had affairs with Amit Chauhan, that is why she left her matrimonial house. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that so far as complicity of the present revisionist is concerned, he was in no way involved in the crime in question and only some bald allegations have been levelled against him. Learned counsel for the revisionist further submitted that even if the sole testimony of p.w.-2/victim is read out, no case whatsoever is made out against the revisionist for summoning him in Case Crime No. 283 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act. 4. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Mamta Pandey, R.S. Pandey, Rajshree Malviya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Navaneet Kumar Shukla, Ravindra Kumar Chauhan Vijay Chauhan Alias Vijayi Chauhan .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) the parties and a perusal of the testimonies of p.w. 1 and p.w.-2, it can be seen that only cursory allegations have been levelled against the revisionist and no specific role is said to be played /assigned by the revisionist herein. There are no specific allegations and mere complicity is not sufficient to summon a prospective accused. Learned counsel for the revisionist has also placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Revision No. 1909 of 2023 Dharmveer Vs. State of U.P. and another. 5. Since cursory allegations have been levelled against the revisionist, no specific role is assigned to him, there is no cogent evidence, as to how and in what manner, the revisionist is involved in the crime in question and his complicity has been shown on a particular date/day, no ground is made out to summon the revisionist. 6. In view of the above, the order impugned dated 10.04.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur is hereby set aside. 7. The revision is allowed. October 6, 2025 Gss CRLR No. 3741 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad