SHOBHA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the order dated 19.11.1992, passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, in Sessions Trial No. 29192, framing charges against the applicants under section 304 -B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) THE submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no charge against the applicants is made out under section 304 -B/34, I.P.C. as also under section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. At the most, it could be a charge under section 306, I.P.C.

(3.) IN Radhey Shyam v. Kunj Behari (AIR 1990 SC 121), Hon'ble the Apex Court has also considered the principles laid down in Mohd. Akbar Darv. State of Jammu and Kashmir (AIR 1981 SC 1548), where it has been pointed out that at the stage of framing of charge, meticulous consideration of evidence and materials by Court is not required. The order of the High Court quashing the charges was set aside. In State of Bihar v. Raj Narain Singh (AIR 1991 SC 1308), the Apex Court condemned quashing of the proceedings by the High Court at the preliminary stage, holding that the High Court should not pre -judge the question without affording reasonable opportunity to the prosecution to substantiate the allegations.