SURENDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed against order dated 18.09.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar vide which petitioner has been charged for offences under Sections 302/377/201 IPC.

(2.) I have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order framing charge against petitioner-accused.

(3.) Brief allegations are that, admittedly petitioner-accused was Incharge of coaching centre i.e. Bright Coaching Centre, Shanti Niketan Colony, Hansi where deceased Ritik was a boarding student and getting training in the institute. The information was received from Medical Officer regarding deceased Ritik through Peon of General Hospital, Hansi by SI Surat Singh on 01.01.2012 at about 8.25 PM and hence, he visited the hospital alongwith other police officials where maternal uncle of deceased, namely, Ajit Kumar met him and handed over a written application to him on the basis of which the present FIR was lodged. According to him on 01.01.2012 at about 10.15 AM a telephonic call was received by him from his brother-in-law that he had gone to Hansi to meet Ritik and however, he was found missing from the Coaching Centre and hence, he also reached the Coaching Centre and met the In-charge of the Centre, i.e. present petitioneraccused and on their saying, petitioner made a report to the police about missing of the child. It was at about 6.15 PM while they were searching the child that they were informed by petitioner-accused that the child had been met and the child was lying on the cot in a dead condition. He was shifted to Civil Hospital, Hansi where he was declared dead and information was sent to the police. It was alleged that he died on account of breaking of his neck and he was satisfied that he was killed by petitioner-accused and his wife. He has also contended that earlier petitioner-accused told him that the child was missing and thereafter, he told that the child was found lying dead on the cot in his coaching centre. It was also told by petitioner-accused to them that the child was struck and crushed between the beddings of the store of Coaching centre. However, on examination by Medical Officer, the neck was found to be lax, freely mobile all round and on dissection of cervical vertebral column C6-C7 joint was found to be dislocated with deep seated ecchymosis in para vertebral muscles and tissues. On further dissection underneath spinal code was eechymosed. Viscera and anal swab was sent to FSL and the site was inspected by Scene of Crime Team. As per FSL report, presence of semen/ blood was found on the clothes and anal swab of the deceased. Hence, offences under Sections 377/201 IPC were also added. However, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed for offence under Section 304 Part II IPC. However, learned trial court after going through the material on record including medical evidence and statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. came to the conclusion that there is sufficient evidence to frame charge under Sections 302/377/201 IPC against petitioner-accused vide impugned order, which has been challenged in this revision petition.