Chanchal Rani v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2026CRLR/8746/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chanchal Rani v. State of U.P. and 3 Others, Criminal Revision No. 8746 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 87, Abdul Shahid, J., decided January 12, 2026. Addition of charge under Section 308 IPC at the instance of the first informant/injured Sumit; power of the trial court to add or alter charge under Section 216 Cr.P.C. at any stage; FIR/Case Crime No. 287 of 2021 under Sections 452, 352, 323, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar Saharanpur; statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; summoning order dated 18.7.2024 by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-3, Saharanpur; revisional court's order dated 1.10.2025 in Criminal Revision No. 380 of 2024 set aside; revision allowed.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision allowed; the impugned order dated 1.10.2025 passed by the revisional court set aside. ¶¶19

Chanchal Rani vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 8746 of 2025

Chanchal Rani

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Opposite
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	: Prashant Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Court No. - 87

¶9

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGA for the State.

¶11

Learned counsel for the revisionist has challenged the impugned order dated 1.10.2025, passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.11, Saharanpur in Criminal Revision No. 380 of 2024, arising out of Criminal Case No. 1343 of 2024 in Case Crime No. 287 of 2021, under Sections 452, 352, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Saharanpur, whereby the revisional court has set aside the order dated 18.7.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-3, Saharanpur summoning the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 under Section 308 IPC.

¶12

Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist-Chanchal Rani is the first informant in the present case. She lodged an FIR on 9.12.2021 against the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and other persons which was registered as Case Crime No. 287 of 2021, under Sections 452, 352, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Saharanpur. In the above-mentioned incident, the son of the revisionist, namely, Sumit had sustained head injury and her medical examination was performed on 9.12.2021 and his x-ray was conducted on 10.12.2021 and thereafter, a supplementary report was prepared on 21.12.2021, wherein it was opined that injured had sustained head injury. The Investigating Officer during investigation has recorded statements of eye witnesses including the statement of injured Sumit under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which clearly demonstrate that offence under Section 308 IPC is made out against the accused/opposite party nos. 2 to 4, even then the I.O. has submitted charge sheet on 6.1.2021 in Case Crime No. 287 of 2021, under Section 452, 352, 323, 506 IPC.

¶13

The learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 452, 352, 323, 506 IPC. After cognizance, when the case was at the stage of framing of charge, the injured Sumit has filed an application before the trial court on 1.4.2023 for framing of charge under Section 308 IPC against the accused/opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and another. The learned Magistrate has perused the entire material on record including the statements of eye witnesses and injury report of injured-Sumit and after

¶14

CRLR No. 8746 of 2025

¶15

¶16

considering the same, came on conclusion that there is sufficient material available on record for summoning the accused persons for an offence under Section 308 IPC also. Accordingly, learned Magistrate has passed an order dated 18.7.2024 summoning the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 under Section 308 IPC and thereafter, the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 obtained bail under Section 308 IPC. Learned revisional court has passed the impugned order in cursory manner which suffers from non application of judicial mind.

¶17

From perusal of the record reflects that learned Magistrate court has taken cognizance on all the available material collected during investigation before him. Learned Magistrate has rightly passed the order dated 18.7.2024 by adding Section 308 IPC. Learned trial court at the stage of trial may add or alter any charge on the basis of any additional or supplementary report or any evidence. The court may add or alter any charge under Section 216 Cr.P.C. at any stage.

¶18

There is no illegality or irregularity in the order dated 18.7.2024, passed by the learned trial court. The impugned order dated 1.10.2025, passed by the revisional court is liable to be set aside and it is set aside.

¶19

The criminal revision stands allowed.

¶20

January 12, 2026 sfa/

¶21

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SYED FAHEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chanchal Rani v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanchal Rani v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitin Agarwal and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Devendra Kumar Kesharwani and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogesh Kumar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Raghvendra vs State of U.P. and Another

Harbans Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others