RAM KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant criminal revision has been preferred by the accused -revisionist against the order dated 27.8.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.16, Kanpur Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 847 of 2006 under Sections 302 and 506 IPC. The brief facts leading to the filing of the instant revision, are that accused -revisionist moved an application at the stage when the trial was fixed for recording statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., stating therein that he was of unsound mind and unable to understand the questions put to him during the proceedings under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The Court ordered for the examination of the accused -revisionist by the doctor of the District Jail, who found the revisionist to be of unsound mind. The revisionist prayed that he should be given benefit of provisions of Section 328 Cr.P.C. Thereafter the revisionist was examined by a Board of Doctors under the supervision of CMO, Kanpur Nagar. The Board recommended that the revisionist be sent for examination in Mental Hospital, Varanasi for expert opinion. The revisionist was sent to Mental Hospital, Varanasi, where he was declared to be of sound mind and was sent back to the District Jail, Kanpur Nagar. The revisionist moved an application 51 -Kha dated 07.07.09 praying that the proceeding of the trial be stayed and the doctor who examined the accused -revisionist, be summoned for examination.

(2.) FROM the perusal of the record, it appears that an application on similar grounds was moved on 18.3.2009 which was rejected on 22,7,2009 by trial court and Criminal Revision No. 3045 of 2009, Ram Kumar Singh Vs. State was filed by the revisionist against this order.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the order, the present revision has been preferred on the grounds that the learned trial court has committed manifest error of law in passing the impugned order against the revisionist which is based on surmises and conjectures. It has also been contended that the doctor, who examined the revisionist in Mental Hospital, Varanasi, ought to have been summoned and examined before passing the impugned order. Submission is that the trial court did not consider the medical examination reports regarding the mental status of the revisionist which were submitted by the jail doctor and the Medical Board held under the supervision of CMO and in fact there was no requirement of seeking any report from Mental Hospital, Varanasi.