JUDGMENT 1. This revision is directed against the order dated December 12,1991 of Addl. Sessions Judge, Deeg in Sessions Case No. 43/89 whereby charges have been framed against the accused-petitioner under Sections 147, 148, 323, 326, 324, 302, 342, and 452 Indian Penal Code. 2. In brief, the facts are that on August 13, 1988, one Ganga Ram made a report at Police Station Kama about the incident which took place at 4.00 p.m. on the same day. As per the report, informant's wife Smt. Kamala was in her house, where all the accused persons came and assaulted her and thereafter took her to their house. It was also stated by the informant that when he tried to save her he was also given beating. 3. On this report, the case was registered under sections 307, 452, 324, 323, 342, 147, 148 and 149 IPC. The injuries of Smt. Kamala were examined by the Medical Officer, Govt. Hospital, Kama. As per the report, she has sustained five injuries which included a compound fracture of upper one-third of left tibia and fubla bone. All other injuries were simple in nature. It further appears that she was admitted in the hospital. It is stated that she died on 13th of October, 1988 but it does not appear from the record that there was any postmortem of her dead body. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the charge under section 302 Indian Penal Code has been framed by the learned Judge without application of mind and without considering the material on record. According to the learned counsel, there is no material on record that the death of Smt. Kamala took place on account of the injuries sustained by her or that the injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. I have seen the order of the learned trial Court holding that the charges under section 302 Indian Penal Code be framed against the petitioners. From the order of the learned Judge, it appears that he has not taken into consideration the entire material on record, to record a finding that prima facie offence under section 302 is made out. The order of the learned judge is absolutely without application of mind. 5. Consequently, I allow this revision and set aside the impugned order framing charges against the petitioners. The order of the learned judge is absolutely without application of mind. 5. Consequently, I allow this revision and set aside the impugned order framing charges against the petitioners. The case is remanded back to the trial Court to re-hear the accused persons and frame charges after taking into consideration the entire material on record. The office is directed to send the record of the case to the trial court immediately, so that the accused persons may be re-heard. The accused persons shall appear before the trial Court on 15.3.1993.Revision allowed. *******