9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bhawna Bai, Appellant herein tried to contact him over his mobile; but he did not receive the call. The Appellant informed her father-in-law who tried to search the deceased and there was no information about the deceased. On the next morning at about 08.00 am, the Appellant-complainant and her family members came to know from the neighbours that Gopal Saran was lying in the tank//hose in the field of the first Respondent-Ghanshyam. The Appellant has alleged that when she tried to approach her husband then Ganesh s/o Mohanlal Kushwah prevented her going near her husband and locked her in a room and did not allow her to see her husband. The dead body of Gopal Saran was taken to government hospital. The Appellant-complainant alleged that without informing her, post-mortem of her husband was conducted. Merg No. 94 of 2015 was registered for investigation Under Section 174 Code of Criminal Procedure; but no case was registered against any person. 4. On 31.12.2015, the Appellant made a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Khargaon and in spite of the same, no case was registered. Thereafter, the complainant-Appellant filed a complaint before the Additional Chief Judi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant has submitted that there are circumstances like "last seen together"; "recovery of dead body"; "not informing the family of the victim immediately upon discovery of dead body"; "not informing the police"; "recovery of other belongings of dead body including tractor" and such other circumstances connecting the Accused-Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 with the death of Gopal Saran and considering those circumstances, the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge satisfied himself that there are sufficient ground for framing charges against the Accused. The learned Counsel submitted that when the trial judge has so satisfied that there are sufficient grounds for framing the charges against the Accused, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, the High Court ought not to have interfered and quashed the charges framed by the trial court. 8. Mr. Harsh Parashar, learned Counsel appearing for the State of Madhya Pradesh reiterated the contentions and submitted that the averments in the charge sheet and the circumstances indicated thereon are sufficient to prima facie link Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to the occurrence and while so, the High Court erred in setting aside the order of the Second Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hether case is beyond reasonable doubt, is not to be seen at this stage. At the stage of framing the charge, the court has to see if there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the Accused. While evaluating the materials, strict standard of proof is not required; only prima facie case against the Accused is to be seen. 13. Chapter XVIII Code of Criminal Procedure deals with "Trial before a Court of Session". As per Section 226 Code of Criminal Procedure, the public prosecutor is required to open the case before the Sessions Court by describing the charge brought against the Accused and stating by what evidence, he proposes to prove the guilt of the Accused. Section 227 Code of Criminal Procedure deals with discharge and it reads as under: 227. Discharge.--If, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the Accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the Accused, he shall discharge the Accused and record his reasons for so doing. 14. Considering the scope of Sections 227 and 228 Code of Criminal Procedure, in Amit Kapoo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e submissions of the Accused and the prosecution in that behalf. The Judge has to pass thereafter an order either Under Section 227 or Section 228 of the Code. If 'the Judge considers that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the Accused, he shall discharge the Accused and record his reasons for so doing', as enjoined by Section 227. If, on the other hand, 'the Judge is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the Accused has committed an offence which -- ... (b) is exclusively triable by the court, he shall frame in writing a charge against the Accused', as provided in Section 228. Reading the two provisions together in juxtaposition, as they have got to be, it would be clear that at the beginning and the initial stage of the trial the truth, veracity and effect of the evidence which the Prosecutor proposes to adduce are not to be meticulously judged. Nor is any weight to be attached to the probable defence of the Accused. It is not obligatory for the Judge at that stage of the trial to consider in any detail and weigh in a sensitive balance whether the facts, if proved, would be incompatible with the innocence of the Accused or not. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quired to record detailed reasons as to why such charge is framed. On perusal of record and hearing of parties, if the judge is of the opinion that there is sufficient ground for presuming that the Accused has committed the offence triable by the Court of Session, he shall frame the charge against the Accused for such offence. 16. As discussed above, in the present case, upon hearing the parties and considering the allegations in the charge sheet, the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge was of the opinion that there were sufficient grounds for presuming that the Accused has committed the offence punishable Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code. The order dated 12.12.2018 framing the charges is not a detailed order. For framing the charges Under Section 228 Code of Criminal Procedure, the judge is not required to record detailed reasons. As pointed out earlier, at the stage of framing the charge, the court is not required to hold an elaborate enquiry; only prima facie case is to be seen. As held in Knati Bhadra Shah and Anr. v. State of West Bengal (2000) 1 SCC 722, while exercising power Under Section 228 Code of Criminal Procedure, the ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
