Dismissed

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P through Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2024CRLR/911/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision filed by Shiv Kumar and three others challenging Sessions Court orders that framed charges including murder under Section 302 I.P.C. The single judge held that the injuries sustained by the deceased were sufficient to cause death and the provisions of Section 216 Cr.P.C. justified the charge, finding no illegality in the impugned orders.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Revision No. 911 of 2024 was dismissed; the impugned orders dated 25.10.2023 and 01.12.2023 were found to be flawless.

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:125190

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 911 of 2024

¶4

Revisionist :- Shiv Kumar And 3 Others

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Principal Secretary (Home) And Another

¶6

Counsel for Revisionist :- Karma Singh Yadav,Satya Pal Singh,Vikash Krishna Murti

¶7

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶10

The instant Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the revisionists, namely, Shiv Kumar, Govind, Karan @ Shani and Sachin, against the orders dated 25.10.2023 and 01.12.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge Jaunpur in Session Trial No. 297 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2023, under Sections 148, 323, 302, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sikrara, District Jaunpur.

¶11

Brief facts of the case which are required to be stated are that opposite party No.2 lodged F.I.R. on 29.03.2023 at 2:26 AM under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. against the revisionists, namely, Shiv Kumar, Govind, Karan @ Shani, Sachin and one Nilesh Kumar with regard to an incident which took place on 28.03.2023 at about 21:00 hours. On the next day of the incident, one of the injured, namely, Palakdhari succumbed to injuries and his postmortem was conducted on 29.03.2023 at about 7:40 PM. After culmination of investigation, chargesheet dated 26.04.2023 was submitted under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 and 304 I.P.C., on which learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on 12.05.2023. Thereafter injured Munna Lal moved an application No. 31 ख for framing of charge under Section 302 I.P.C. also against the revisionists, which

¶12

has been allowed vide impugned order dated 25.10.2023 and accordingly vide order dated 01.12.2023 charges under Sections 148, 323 read with Section 34, 302 read with Section 34, 504 and 506 I.P.C. have been framed against the revisionists. Both the aforesaid orders are the subject matter of challenge in the instant case.

¶13

Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the revisionists is that injury Nos. 4 and 5 which were found on the body of the deceased- Palakdhari were punctured wounds, therefore, the same do not corroborate from the prosecution case, hence, no offence under Section 302 I.P.C. is made out. The trial court has committed error in framing charge under Section 302 I.P.C. against the revisionists.

¶14

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State refuting the said submissions of learned counsel for the revisionists submits that accused persons with common intention attacked on the deceased- Palakdhari with stick and rods with an intention to kill him, due to which Palakdhari died on reaching the hospital as a result of injuries.

¶15

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that as per the prosecution case accused persons on 21.08.2023, while coming to the Court abused and assaulted the deceased with stick and rods giving threat to kill him, if he testified. On the next day of the incident, Palakdhari died due to injuries caused by the said incident. Apart from injured persons, total five injuries were found on the body of the deceasedPalakdhari. The nature of injuries indicates that the accused had caused injuries to the deceased by repeatedly attacking on him and the said injuries were sufficient to cause death of Palakdhari in normal course. As on date considering the prosecution case, I find that prima facie all the basic ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 302 I.P.C. are present in this case. This Court is also of the view that as per provisions of Section 216 Cr.P.C., charge can be altered at any stage of trial as per evidence led before the trial court.

¶16

In view of the above, I do not find any illegality in the impugned orders dated 25.10.2023 and 01.12.2023, which are flawless.

¶17

The instant criminal revision lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed .

¶18

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Trial Court as well as to the opposite party no.2 within a week.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.8.2024 Kashifa

¶20

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P through Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar and 3 Others v. State of U.P through Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow and 5 Others

Manoj vs State of Up and 3 Others

Sachin and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju @ Devenra Kumar Tiwari and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Gaurav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others