RAMU Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.09.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sant Kabir Nagar, in S.T No. 196 of 2018 (State Vs. Ramu), Case Crime No. 577 of 2018, under Sections 323, 304 I.P.C., Police Station - Ghanghata, District - Sant Kabir Nagar, whereby application of the revisionist for discharge was rejected and revisionist was summoned. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State. Entire record has been perused.

(2.) All the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the revisionist relate to disputed questions of fact. The court has also been called upon to adjudge the testimonial worth of prosecution evidence and evaluate the same on the basis of various intricacies of factual details which have been touched upon by the learned counsel. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded.

(3.) Before proceeding to adjudge the validity of the impugned order it may be useful to cast a fleeting glance to some of the representative cases decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which have expatiated upon the legal approach to be adopted at the time of framing of the charge or at the time of deciding whether the accused ought to be discharged. It shall be advantageous to refer to the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar vs. Ramesh Singh 1977 (4) SCC 39 which are as follows :-