Allahabad High Court
Janki vs State Of U.P.And Another on 1 April, 2022
Author: Mohd. Aslam
Bench: Mohd. Aslam
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21785 of 2021 Applicant :- Janki Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Aslam,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf of applicant for quashing the order dated 10.8.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.12, Moradabad as well as entire proceedings of S.T. No.975 of 2012 (State Vs. Janki), arising out of Case Crime No.193 of 2011, under Sections 326/34 of I.P.C., Police Station Kudhfatehgarh, District Moradabad.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in the aforesaid case, the charge under Sections 307/34, 504, 506 I.P.C. was framed against the accused Bhura and Janki on 22.11.2012 and later on 10.8.2021, the charge under Section 326/34 I.P.C. was also framed against the applicant. It is further submitted that the injured has admitted that marpeet was taken place from both sides, therefore, the charge under Section 326/34 I.P.C. cannot be framed.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and has stated that the fire arm injury was found on the body of the injured Smt. Neetu and the grievous injury was found on the left forearm and on x-ray the injury was found of grievous nature as it appears from the supplementary injury report and, therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed.
I have given thoughtful consideration to the contention raised by learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. There is a provision for alteration or addition to any charge under Section 216 of Cr.P.C., which states as follows:-
"(1) Any Court may alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced.
(2) Every such alteration or addition shall be read and explained to the accused.
(3) If the alteration or addition to a charge is such that proceeding immediately with the trial is not likely, in the opinion of the Court, to prejudice the accused in his defence or the prosecutor in the conduct of the case, the Court may, in its discretion, after such alteration or addition has been made, proceed with the trial as if the altered or added charge had been the original charge.
(4) If the alteration or addition is such that proceeding immediately with the trial is likely, in the opinion of the Court, to prejudice the accused or the prosecutor as aforesaid, the Court may either direct a new trial or adjourn the trial for such period as may be necessary.
(5) If the offence stated in the altered or added charge is one for the prosecution of which previous sanction is necessary, the case shall not be proceeded with until such sanction is obtained, unless sanction has been already obtained for a prosecution on the same facts as those on which the altered or added charge is founded."
In Section 326 of I.P.C., grievous hurt has been defined, which states as follows:-
"326. Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means?Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance, or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
In view of above discussions, I find that the learned court below has rightly framed the additional charge under Section 326/34 of I.P.C., which can be done at any stage before passing of the judgment. Hence, the present application is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 1.4.2022 Anil K. Sharma