PRASANNA KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally.

(2.) THIS revision petition has been preferred under Sections 397, 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 6.3.13 passed by second ASJ, Dabra, Gwalior, in S.T.No.138/13, whereby charges under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 -B of IPC have been framed against the petitioner.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that prima facie there is no material to frame the charges against the petitioner. The petitioner is a stamp vendor since 2005. He has been authorized by the government. The petitioner has no concern whether the person who has purchased the stamp has used it or abused it. The petitioner has not entered into any conspiracy. Therefore, learned trial Court has committed an illegality in framing the charges against the petitioner. Hence, prayed for quashing of the charges. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State supported the order framing charges against the petitioner submitting that there is prima facie evidence against the petitioner.