HEMRAJ Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') the accused persons, six in number, have called in question the penetrability of the order dated 1-7-1996 passed by the learned Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal, in S. T. No. 141/96 whereby he has framed charges under Sections 304-B and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity 'the IPC) against the petitioners after refusing to pass an order of discharge in their favour.

(2.) THE facts as have been unfurled are that the marriage of the deceased, Mamta, was solemnised with Jagmat Singh and they belong to the same village having their houses in close proximity. As there was demand of dowry and the deceased was treated with cruelty she extinguished her life spark by consuming poison on 24-12-1995. On an FIR being lodged the criminal law was set in motion and eventually after completion of the investigation charge-sheet was placed before the Competent Court which in turn, committed the matter to the Court of Session. Thereafter, the matter stood transferred to the learned Trial Judge.

(3.) AT the time of framing of charges a prayer was made to discharge the accused persons on the grounds that a divorce had already taken place between the husband and the deceased; that there was no material on record to book them under Section 304-B of the IPC or for that matter under Section 306, IPC; that the deceased had died in her parental house; and that in the dying declaration she had not implicated any of the accused persons to attract their complicity in the offences of this nature. The learned Trial Judge on a perusal of the material brought on record came to hold that there was prima facie allegation against the accused persons and, therefore, there was no justification for not framing of charges, and accordingly he proceeded to frame the charges against the accused persons.