JUDGMENT 1. - This misc. petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 21.10.2011 whereby the revisional Court has upheld the order of the trial Court whereby the trial Court had amended the charge against the present petitioner and framed charges under Section 458 I.P.C. 2. The short facts of the case are that criminal case has been registered against the present petitioner for the offences under Sections 458 and 323 I.P.C. After investigation challan has been filed against the present petitioner. The learned trial Court has framed the charges against the present petitioner. The State Government filed revision petition against the accusation and the matter has been remanded back to the trial Court and after hearing the parties, the trial Court has framed the charge under Sections 323 and 451 I.P.C., against which no revision petition has been filed by the State Government or the complainant and application for compounding of the offence has been filed before the trial Court but the trial Court has altered the charge under Section 458 I.P.C. and rejected the application for compounding the offence. The revision petition was filed, which was also dismissed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The only contention of the present petitioner is that when the matter has been amicably settled by the parties, charges should not have been altered and looking at the fact that after order of the revision Court, the trial Court had considered the material on record and framed charge under Section 451 I.P.C. only, against which no revision has been filed by the State Government and hence when the matter has been compromised, charge should not have been altered. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment reported in the case of Antra Ran v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2011 (2) RJT 1226 wherein it has been held that charge cannot be modified unless the order of framing charge is challenged and he has also placed reliance upon the judgment reported in the case of Sukliraj Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2011 (2) Cr LR (Raj.) 1157 . 6. 6. Looking at the fact that after considering the material on record, charge has been framed against the present petitioner under Section 451, I.P.C. only and when the matter has been compromised amicably by the parties, alteration of charge, without giving any cogent reasons, is unwarranted. It is not in dispute that under Section 216, Cr.P.C. the Court can alter or add any charge at any stage by the trial Court but in the present case in hand, when the matter has been settled by the parties, alteration of charge was unwarranted and hence this misc. petition deserves to be allowed. 7. In view of the above, this misc. petition is allowed and the orders passed by the Courts below whereby charge has been framed Under Section 458, I.P.C. are hereby quashed..Petition Allowed. *******