Allahabad High Court
Kali Charan And 3 Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 21 November, 2019
Author: Ajit Singh
Bench: Ajit Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4055 of 2019 Revisionist :- Kali Charan And 3 Ors. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava,Subhash Chandra Raghav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of revisionists in the court today is taken on record.
This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the judgement and order dated 14.8.2019 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras, by the impugned order the application moved by the revisionists/accused under Section 227 Cr.PC. with a prayer to discharge them was rejected and the accused persons were not discharged by the trial court.
Brief facts leading to this revision are that an FIR was lodged by the complainant Vikas Kumar on 21.7.2017 at about 5:00 p.m. with the allegations that he received an information on 20.7.2017 at about 9:00 a.m. that Kali Charan, son of Talewar Ganga Devi, wife of Talewar, Raju, son of Talewar and Radha, wife of Raju, resident of Ramchela, police station-Sadahad had murdered his sister by giving her poison. After receiving this information he rushed to Ramchela along with his brother Omvir Mahesh, Shishpal and other. It was mentioned in the FIR that deceased Rani had given birth two sons and a daughter. Both the sons had died and the daughter is handicapped. It was also mentioned in the FIR that Kalicharan had threatened several times that Rani is not agreeing to the second marriage of him with another woman, so he will kill her and remarry with another woman. Kalicharan was having illicit relations with Radha, wife of his brother Raju and this was opposed by the deceased Rani several times, due to this reason all the accused persons had killed his sister after consuming poison to her.
The matter was investigated by the police and after completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted chargesheet against accused persons and after taking cognizance of the offence by the C.J.M., the case was committed to the court of Session and before the court of Session an application under Section 229 Cr.P.C. was moved by the accused persons with a prayer to discharged them, which was rejected by the trial court vide order dated 14.8.2019.
Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that there was no intention of the accused persons to commit the murder and thee is no dying declaration of the deceased. He further submitted that the deceased had committed suicide by consuming poison in a spell of depression, emanating from the fact that she was not having any son and her daughter is handicapped. The accused persons are totally innocent and they have been falsely implicated by the complainant just to harass and to extract money from them.
On the other hand learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the argument advanced by learned counsel for the revisionists and submitted that the discharge application has rightly been dismissed as there is sufficient evidence available on record against the accused persons.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, the object of Section 227 is to ensure that the court should be satisfied that the accusation made against the accused is not frivolous and that there is some material for proceeding against the accused persons and at the state of section 227, the judge has merely to sift the evidence in order to find out whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. The sufficiency of ground would take within its fold the nature of the evidence recorded by the police or the documents produced before the court which ex-facie disclose that there are suspicious circumstances against the accused so as to frame a charge against the accused.
Perusal of the material shows that the deceased Rani had died due to consumption of poison in unnatural circumstances and the deceased was living in the house of accused persons.
After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find that the impugned order suffers from any illegality or infirmity requiring any interference by this Court.
Learned counsel for the revisionists has failed to demonstrate that the impugned order is either perverse or vitiated by any legal infirmity.
The revision lacks merits and is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage itself.
Order Date :- 21.11.2019 Faridul