HARI NARAYAN GUPTA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) THE petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 20.12.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro, in S.T. No. 180 of 2011, whereby the application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., was allowed and the petitioners were summoned to face the trial for the offences under Sections 304B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court is absolutely illegal, in view of the fact that the trial was separated, in which, the husband of the deceased was ultimately acquitted by the Trial Court for the offences under sections 304B and 302 of the IPC, but he has been convicted and sentenced only for the offence under Section 498A of the IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has accordingly, submitted that on the same set of the evidence the conviction of the petitioners for the offence under Sections 304B and 302 of the IPC cannot be secured and the impugned order is fit to be set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that even otherwise, there is no material to secure the conviction of the petitioners and as such the impugned order passed by the Court below is absolutely illegal and the same cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.