Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1294 (RAJ)

Tejaram v. State of Rajasthan

2012-05-17

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2012
JUDGMENT 1. - The instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 10.8.2007 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, jodhpur in Sessions Case No. 85/2007, whereby, charges have been framed against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 498-A, 306 and in the alternative for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. 2. the grievance which has been advanced by way of instant revision petition is that by virtue of Section 221(2) Criminal Procedure Code, the framing of a charge under Section 302 Indian Penal Code as an alternate to the charge under Section 306 Indian Penal Code is not permissible. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offences under Sections 302 and 306 Indian Penal Code arc- distinct offences and one cannot be said to be an alternative of the another. The nature of the acts and evidence required to prove both the charges are absolutely different, as such, the framing of an alternative charge for these two offences in the same case is bound to prejudice the accused and therefore the order impugned dated 10.8.2007 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jodhpur is absolutely illegal. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the revision petition. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, upon considering the arguments advanced at the bar and going through the order impugned as well as the material available on the record of the case and in view of the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dalbir Singh v. State of U.P., reported in AIR 2004 SC 1990 and Narwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in AIR 2011 SC 686 , it is evident that the Hon'ble Apex Court in these two cases has held that earlier view taken by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sangaraboina Sreenu v. State of A.P., reported in AIR 1997 SC 3233 does not lay down good law. The Hon'ble Apex Court distinctly held that wherein the accused in charged for the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code he can very well be convicted for the offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code even if no charge for the offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code had been farmed. The Hon'ble Apex Court distinctly held that wherein the accused in charged for the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code he can very well be convicted for the offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code even if no charge for the offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code had been farmed. In so many words, the Hon'ble Apex Court has Lald down that Section 306 Indian Penal Code is lessor offence of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. 5. In view of the authoritative pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to above, this Court is of the opinion that the order dated 10.8.2007 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jodhpur framing charge against the petitioner for the offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code and in the alternative for offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code cannot be said to be illegal or bad in the eye of law.Resultantly, this revision petition as well as stay petition being bereft of any force are hereby rejected.Revision dismissed. *******