RAMCHANDRA SHRILAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are taking exceptions to the charge which has been framed against them by Sessions Judge, Rajgarh in Sessions Trial No. 108/90. By the charge applicant Kalu s/o Gopal has been charged for an offence punishable under Section 307 simpliciter. However, applicants 1 and 2 namely Ramchandra s/o Shrilal and Kesharsingh s/o Kaniram have been charged for committing an offence punishable under Sections 307, 326 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) SHRI A. S. Kutumbale, counsel for the petitioners argued that the FIR and the statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, are abundantly making it clear that the intention of the applicants was to commit an offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code either simpliciter or read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. There was absolutely no need of framing of charge against the petitioners for an offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code. He made reference to FIR and statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation for substantiating his arguments. Countering to that, Shri K. K. Gupta, learned Government Advocate submitted that the charge for offence punishable under Section 307 either simpliciter or r/w 34, Indian Penal Code, is justified by material on record. He pointed out that in the FIR the victim has made a statement that had he not been released by the prosecution witnesses, the appellants would have murdered him.

(3.) IN view of the arguments advanced before me, the FIR and the statements of witnesses recorded during the course of investigation have been carefully examined.