WPCRL No. 525 of 2010 With Stay Appl. No. 5336 / 10 Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate, present for the petitioner. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State. Heard. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 21.05.2010, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Roorkee, in Criminal Revision No. 447 of 2009, whereby said court has affirmed the order dated 30th of November 2009, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, in Criminal Case No. 2368 of 2007, Poonam Prasad Vs. Virendra, relating to offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C., and one punishable under Section 3/4 of the Dowry prohibition Act, 1961. I have gone through the impugned order dated 21.05.2010, passed by the revisional court, and the order dated 30th of November 2009, passed by the trial court. The trial court has rejected the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. moved by the complainant / writ petitioner for summoning five more accused in the criminal complaint case No. 2368 of 2007. The Magistrate has given reasons for his satisfaction as to why Ramadhar Prasad, Smt. Dhanwati, Pushpa, Manorama and Jogeshwar are not liable to be summoned. The revisional court has concurred with the view taken by the trial court. This Court in its writ jurisdiction is not inclined to interfere with the factual satisfaction recorded by the courts below. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed summarily. (Inte rim Relief Application No. 5336 of 2010 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 07.07.2010 HN