HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5084 of 2024 Court No. - 90 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 3.7.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge / F.T.C.-II, Saharanpur in Criminal Revision No. 231 of 2022 (Rampal vs. State of U.P. and another) (CNR No. UPSPO10075052022) passed in Complaint Case No. 78 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 887 of 2019, under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Deoband, District-Saharanpur, by which the application moved by the revisionist under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge /F.T.C.-II, Saharanpur is wholly illegal and arbitrary as there was sufficient evidence available on record, such as chargesheet and other documents available with the chargesheet. He next submitted that the entire case is based on documentary evidence, therefore, the oral evidence is not required in the present case and hence, there is no occasion for waiting the testimony of other witnesses to be recorded at a later stage. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 has submitted that in the present case, the examination in chief of one of the witness has been recorded and the cross examination is yet to be recorded. He next submitted that besides PW-1 there are other witnesses, those are also relatives of the informant and yet to be examined. In the facts and circumstances, as and when available evidence comes on record, to reach a Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Abhishe Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Atul Kumar, G.A. Brahm Singh .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) conclusion by a Court, whether a case is made out against the prospective accused persons to be summoned for facing trial. 5. Having regard to the rival contentions and perusal of the order dated 3.7.2024, it can be seen that the learned Additional Session Judge / F.T.C.-II has reached to the conclusion, that the evidence of other witnesses is yet to be recorded and apart from the evidence of a single witness, i.e. PW-1, the examination in chief has been recorded and therefore, the said evidence is not sufficient to summon the prospective accused persons and the order passed by learned Additional Session Judge / F.T.C.-II, dated 3.7.2024 appears to be in accordance with the procedure and the law, hence no interfere is called for by this Court for the reason, that both the parties are at liberty to defend their case before learned Sessions Judge for commencing the trial. The order dated 3.7.2024 calls for no interference at this stage. 6. The revision lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed. October 10, 2025 Faridul CRLR No. 5084 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad