SUNITA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition, challenge is made to the correctness, legality and propriety of the order dtd. 25/5/2022 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bhadra, District Hanumangarh, whereby the learned Court has framed charge against the petitioner under Ss. 307, 326/34 of the IPC.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Perused the impugned order and other material available on record.

(3.) After going through the order impugned dtd. 25/5/2022, this Court is not satisfied with the manner in which the order framing charge has been passed, it seems that the submissions made on behalf of the accused and the facts in nutshell have not been incorporated. It is true that at the stage of framing charges, meticulous appreciation of evidence is not required to be done nor the probative value of the defence is to be taken into account but at least, bare minimum fact necessary to show constitution of offence as well as the mandate of law contained under Ss. 227 and 228 of the Cr.P.C. are to be taken care of. A prima facie opinion that there are reasonable grounds to presume that the offence has been committed by the accused before the Court, is to be formed and that is to be done after taking into consideration the case of the prosecution and the submission made on behalf of the accused as well after going through the facts of the case.