BHIM SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed a revision petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the order dated 21.12.1989 of Shri P.K.Dham, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. directing the framing of charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the following charge:

(3.) The petitioner has filed this petition on the ground that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has erroneously framed charge under Section 307 of the lndian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, as it is contrary to the available material and documents of the case. The principal submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner Shri D.R. Sethi has been that the report of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory completely demolishes the case of the prosecution and in view of the report of the CFSL, no charge under Section 307 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act can be framed. The report of the CFSL is dated 29.12.89. Since the entire controversy in this case revolves the CFSL Report, therefore, it would be appropriate to recapitulate the relevant portion of the CFSL Report. The results of, the examination are set out as under: The Result of Examination