IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.992 of 2007 BIMLA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4 13.4.2010 This revision application has been preferred against the order dated 29.5.2007 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan in S.Tr.No. 242/04 whereby the petition dated 21.11.2006 filed by petitioner under section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning opposite party nos. 2 and 3 as additional accused has been rejected. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Opposite party nos. 2 and 3 are unmarried Nanad of the deceased. They are named in the F.I.R. showing them involved in demand and causing dowry death but final form submitted in the case exonerating them from any liability. A protest petition was filed at the stage of charge sheet but that also was not allowed. Three of the witnesses are examined and now a prayer was made to issue summons against opposite party nos.2 and 3 also but learned counsel appearing for the petitioner failed to show any of the witnesses in whose presence any demand was made on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 3. 2 It further transpires from the statement of the informant (P.W.3) who is mother of the deceased that demand was made by all the family members including opposite party nos. 2 and 3. Similar allegation was made in the F.I.R. Thus, I find no illegality in the impugned order from which petitioner’s prayer to summon opposite party nos.2 and 3 to face trial is refused. In the result, the revision application is dismissed at the stage of admission. Let the carbon copy of case diary be sent back to the aforesaid court below. AI ( Mandhata Singh, J.)