KRISHNAMMAL Vs. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order dated 17/8/2007 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition no. 269 of 2007 in Sessions Case No. 223 of 2006 by the Additional Sessions cum Fast track Court No. I, Tuticorin, is now under challenge.

(2.) THE wife of the deceased by name krishnammal has filed Criminal Miscellaneous petition No. 269 of 2007, praying to frame additional charges under Sections 302, read with 34, 120 (b), 201, 217, 218, 220, 331, 342, 348 and 367 of the Indian penal Code. The Court below has come to the conclusion to the effect that framing of additional charge does not arise at this stage. Against the order passed by the Court below, the present criminal revision case has been filed.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has repeatedly contended that all the accused have committed offences under Sections 302, read with 34, 120 (b), 201, 217, 218, 220, 331, 342, 348 and 367 of the Indian Penal Code, but. the Court below has framed a charge simpliciter under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and in order to frame additional charges, the revision petitioner as petitioner has filed criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 269 of 2007, but, the Court below without considering the contentions urged on the side of the revision petitioner, has erroneously dismissed the same and therefore, the impugned order passed by the Court below is liable to be set aside and necessary direction to be given to the Court below for framing additional charges.