Ram Awadh And Anr. vs State Of U.P. And Others
2011 Latest Caselaw 2834 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?A.F.R. 
 
Court No. - 50
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 13499 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Ram Awadh And Anr.
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Hemant Kumar
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble S.C. Agarwal,J. 

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Dinesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 25.5.2011 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.16, Azamgarh as well as order dated 28.8.2010 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.10, Azamgarh in case no. 2679 of 2005 (Hari Lal Vs. Ram Awadh & others) under sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Belwaria, District Azamgarh.

The case was proceeding under section 494 IPC. During the course of hearing, the trial court decided to frame additional charge under sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners filed revision, which has been dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on the basis of same evidence, earlier cognizance was taken for the offence under section 494 IPC, and on the basis of same evidence, new charge cannot be added.

Section 216 Cr.P.C. provides that any Court may alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced.

From the evidence recorded under section 244 Cr.P.C., the offence punishable under section 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act was also disclosed and, therefore, the impugned orders cannot be said to be unjustified or illegal. However, after framing of the additional charge, the petitioners shall be entitled to recall the witnesses for further cross-examination.

With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed.

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that if the petitioners again surrender before the Magistrate concerned within a period of three weeks from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail be considered by the courts below keeping in view a Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. 2004 (57) ALR 290 as affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).

If for any reason, disposal of the bail application on the same day is not possible, then the petitioners shall be released by the courts below on interim bail till the final disposal of their bail application.

For a period of three weeks, no coercive steps shall be executed against the petitioners.

Order Date :- 19.7.2011

ss