VIJAI PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Cr. P.C.'), dated 19.5.2004, passed by Special Judge (E. C. Act), Jaunpur, in S.T. No. 462 of 1999 State v. Vijay Pandey and others, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 304, 504 and 506, I.P.C. has been challenged.

(2.) BY the impugned order, the learned court below has allowed the application 45B moved on behalf of complainant to frame alternate charge under Sections 302 and 307, I.P.C.

(3.) THE main submission made by learned counsel for the revisionists was that without taking any evidence the court below could not frame additional charge under Section 302/307 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and hence the impugned order being illegal, deserves to be quashed. For this submission, reliance has been placed on Ishwarchand Amichand Govadia v. State of Maharashtra and another, 2007 (1) All JIC 37 : 2006 (3) ACR 3192 (SC) and Munna Lal Agrawal v. State of U. P. and others, 2002 CBC 354 : 2002 (2) ACR 1210.