VINOD AHIR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dtd. 14/12/2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nimbahera, District Chittorgarh whereby the learned Judge has framed the charges against the petitioners for offences under Ss. 148/149, 341/149, 323/149, 325/149, 427/149, 395/149 and 397/149 of IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after thorough investigation, challan has been filed for the offences under Ss. 395, 325, 427, 323 and 341 of the IPC against the petitioners but the learned trial court has added the offence under Sec. 397/149 of IPC without assigning any cogent reason. Counsel submits that the trial court did not consider the evidence as well as the injury report and other aspects of the matter and directly framed the charge against the petitioners for the offence under Sec. 397/149 of IPC. Counsel further submits that the trial court passed a stereotyped order of framing charges against the petitioners without assigning any cogent reason. Therefore, orders of framing charge for offence under Sec. 397/149 of IPC is absolutely illegal and deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor supported the order passed by the learned trial court and contended that learned trial court has considered the materials available on record for framing charge against the petitioners and therefore, the order impugned is not liable to be interfered with in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.