MD. MAKBOOL ALAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against impugned order dtd. 14/3/2023, whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Nawada passed in Sessions Trial No. 323 of 2023/C.I.S. No. 3285 of 2014, arising out of Warisliganj P.S. Case No. 64 of 2011 has rejected the application.

(2.) The application under Sec. 216 Cr.PC was filed by the prosecution at the stage of final argument when statement of the accused-Ayasha Khatoon was recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.PC after recording of prosecution evidence. The accused- Ayasha Khatoon, who is O.P. No.2 herein, was facing charge under Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code. However, as per the application of the prosecution, sufficient evidence had come on record in the evidence of P.W.-1, P.W.-5 and P.W.-8 to frame additional charge under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the application filed by the prosecution was opposed by the accused submitting that there was no sufficient material to frame additional charge under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused. However, after hearing both the parties and perusal of the evidence on record, learned Trial Court has dismissed the application of the prosecution for framing additional charge under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that there is no substance or merit in the application of the prosecution. Learned Trial Court has exhaustively dealt with evidence of all the prosecution witnesses including the injury report and the Doctor to find there is no sufficient material to frame additional charge under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused-Ayasha Khatoon for facing the trial.

(3.) Hence, being aggrieved by such order, the petitioner has preferred the present criminal revision petition.