GUDDUBAI Vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR AWASTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision of the complaint against the order dated 25.8.1990 passed by the Fourth Additional Judge to the Court of Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in Sessions Trail No. 50 of 1990 whereby no charge has been framed against Salim Khan, Station Officer, Hardalpur and instead framing charge under section 302 I.P.C., charges only under section 304 Part-II and section 201 I.P.C. have been framed against other accused (Non-applicants No. 1 to 3)

(2.) The present criminal case was instituted against the non-applicants on the allegation that one Pontu Dhimar was arrested by the police for interrogation on the charge of Commission of theft. According to the allegation of two other prisoners lodged in the police station, deceased Pontu was beaten up by non-applicant Nos. 1 to 4 who were employees in the staff of the police at the police station. The body of the deceased Pontu was recovered from a well and according to the medical opinion, he died of asphyxia.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the complainant, who is widow of deceased Puntu, urged that the learned Judge of the trial Court instead of framing charge on the basis of the allegations contained in the police papers and the statements of witnesses recorded by the police made a meticulous exercise of weighing and appreciating the statements on record. The learned Judge of the trial Court thus wrongly discharged to the main accused Salim Khan; Station Officer, and instead of framing charge under section 302 I.P.C. framed only a charge under section 304, Part-II I.P.C. against the accused. Reliance on behalf of the complainant is placed on Radhey Shyam v. Kunj Behari and State of Bihar v. Raj Narain Singh. Non-applicant No. 4 Salim Khan has been duly noticed; but has failed to enter appearance in this Court. There is on record a report dated 23.9.1991 submitted by S.P. Chhatarpur informing this Court that non applicant No. 4 Salim Khan was duly served with the notice of the revision and an acknowledgment to that effect was also sent to the Registry by S.P. Chhatarpur. Non-applicant No. 4 in spite of service has avoided to appear in this Court.