HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4039 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present revision has been filed challenging the order dated 17.5.2024 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge,FTC No. 3, Muzaffarnagar, by which the application filed by the revisionist under Section 319 Cr.P.C. in S.T.No. 72 of 2021 ( State Vs. Farhana) arising out of Case Crime No. 502 of 2020, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Muzaffarnagar, has been rejected, wherein other three persons namely Sibbu, Aasu and Sakib were allegedly made prospective accused in the incident, in which the son of the revisionist died under suspicious circumstances. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further alleged that the wife of the deceased was in some conversation with the prospective accused persons. The son of the revisionist has died on 24/25.06.2020 and the dead body was cremated as per rites and rituals of the community. However, on suspicion the said body was taken out of the grave and postmortem was conducted by the competent doctor. In the postmortem report, the cause of death of the deceased was found due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. 4. It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that if it was the case that the deceased hanged himself, there was no question of ante-mortem injuries. In the present case injury was also found on the body of the deceased and he further submitted that, it was not possible for a single person namely wife of the deceased, that she alone could have committed Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Ashutosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Syed Riyaz Askari Mohd Sageer .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) such crime, therefore, she would have been assisted by some other persons for commission of such crime, killing her own husband. It has further submitted that there is ample evidence on record i.e. the independent witness Rukhsana, who stated before the police that three persons came on the fateful day in the house of the deceased and they came out from the house after 1 and 1/2 hours, saying that they have done away the deceased. It has further been contended that, it is a confession made in front of an independent witness. Similar statements were also given by the brothers of the deceased namely Aasif and Rahim. After lodging the FIR, chargesheet was submitted under Section 306 I.P.C. After framing of the charge, two witnesses have been examined, who supported the prosecution case. Moreover, witness Rukhsana who is neighbor of the deceased was witness of the trial. Seven witnesses have been left in the trial. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 to 4 submits that there is nothing on record to show that the wife of the deceased was having some affairs with any of the accused persons. The opp. party nos. 2 to 4 have been falsely implicated and false application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. has been filed in order to wreak vengeance against these three persons/ opp. party nos. 2 to 4. 6. Learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 to 4 submits that, though it was a case of hanging or suicide but no credible evidence is available as to, under what circumstance, the deceased committed suicide or has died. 7. Having regard to the rival submissions and moreover, post mortem report suggests that, the cause of death of the deceased was antemortem injuries and same evidence has come on record that there was some altercation between the husband and wife Farhana, who was having some affairs with either of the opp. party nos. 2 to 4 and it was not possible for the wife of the deceased to commit such crime alone. However, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge concerned has passed the order taking into consideration the evidence of two witnesses, though the said evidence has not been considered in letter and spirit. 8. Be that as it may, it is provided that once the evidence of the witnesses of fact is complete, the question of summoning the prospective accused persons shall be considered prior to recording the statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. CRLR No. 4039 of 2024 2 9. Under the circumstances of the case, the order dated 17.05.2024 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge,FTC No. 3, Muzaffarnagar is set aside and it is directed that the matter of summoning the prospective accused persons shall be considered afresh for completion of the evidence of witnesses of fact in the trial. 10. The revision is disposed of as above. September 10, 2025 Gss CRLR No. 4039 of 2024 3 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad