Ramesh Jaiswal And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 1094 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 83
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 439 of 2022
 

 
Revisionist :- Ramesh Jaiswal And 2 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Rakesh Pathak,Manoj Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

This criminal revision has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 08.11.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 22, Allahabad in S.T. No. 606 of 2017 (State vs. Ramesh Jiswal and others), under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Colonelganj, District Allahabad.

Learned counsel for the revisionists submits that the revisionists are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. They have committed no offence. He further submitted that admittedly, the revisionists and complainant are neighbours and there is a dispute between them regarding shop. He further submitted that in the incident, one Vipul Kumar Yadav is said to have committed suicide. The F.I.R. of the present case is delayed by one day without any explanation. He further submitted that according to mortem report, victim died due to asphyxia as a result of anti-mortem hanging. He further submitted that one suicide note is said to be found in the handwriting of deceased which was sent for Forensic examination but no report has been received so far. He further argued that no offence is made out against the revisionists under Section 306 I.P.C. He showed some documents in favour of his contention.

Learned AGA opposed the revision and submitted that a suicide note in the handwriting of deceased is found, which was sent to Forensic examination but report is still awaited. So far as the question of constituting the offence in any particular section is concerned, it can be debated at the time of framing of charge but it is not a matter of quashing of charge sheet. The Investigating Officer, investigate the matter and submitted charge sheet against the revisionists. It is not a case of grave injustice or abuse of process of law.

The charge sheet is questioned on the ground of medical evidence but death of deceased is not disputed. The offence under the specific section can be debated at the time of framing of charge but it is not an abuse of process of law.

Upon consideration of overall facts and circumstances of the case, rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the recovery of suicide note allegedly in the handwriting of deceased, it cannot be said that no offence is made out, I do not see any good ground warranting interference in the matter.

The present revision lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 11.4.2022

Manoj