M.R. Pathak, J.

Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Rokhum, learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram for the petitioner State. Also heard Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, learned Amicus Curiae for the accused respondent No. 1. Lalfakawma and Mr. H. Lalrinthanga, learned counsel for the accused respondent No. 2. Lalrindika.

2. The brief facts of the case is that on 19.04.2014, the informant H. Vanlalbiaa lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Khawzawl Police Station, Mizoram stating that on the said date around 06:00 pm, his grand-son Ronald Lalrinpuia, aged about 24 years was found dead, lying on his bed, in his rented house with injuries on his back side and that it appears some culprit had murdered him and therefore requested the authority to take necessary action. Accordingly, Khawzawl P.S Case No. 29/2014 under Section 302 IPC was registered.

3. During the course of investigation, the concerned Investigation Officer visited the place of occurrence, made inquest with the authority concerned in presence of the witnesses, send dead body of the deceased for its postmortem examination, recorded the statement of the witnesses acquainted to the facts of case, seized one blood stained hammer, one blood stained pillow with its pillow case, one blood stained bed-sheet, one Nokia cell phone set and one syringe in presence of the seizure witnesses.

4. It is seen that during his visit to the place of occurrence and during inquest, the concerned Investigating Officer found the deceased person with pool of blood under pillow and the wall near the head of the deceased had blood stains and further found two deep injuries on the back side of the head of the deceased where-from whole lot of larva were coming out. On obtaining the postmortem report and the call detail reports (CDR) of the mobile handset of the deceased and on obtaining sufficient evidence, arrested both the accused persons and on completion of the investigation the Investigating Officer found prima facie case against the accused respondents and with due permission on prayer added Section 392 & 34 and filed the charge sheet in the said Khawzawl P.S. Case No. 29/2014 on 16.11.2014 against both the accused persons under Section 302/392/34 IPC.

5. The Trial Court, i.e. the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl after going through the charge sheet of the case, considering the submission of the counsels for the accused persons came to a finding that death of the deceased cannot be caused by two different persons at different times with a single hammer and he could not find any material to connect the murder of the deceased with the available evidence on record collected by the Investigating officer in the case and found no ground to proceed with the case and accordingly vide his order dated 24.08.2015 passed in Sessions Case No. 21/2015 corresponding to Criminal Trial No. 289/2015 arising out of Khawzawl P.S. Case No. 29/2014 discharged both the accused respondents from the liability of the charges under Sections 302/392/34 of Indian penal Code.

6. Being aggrieved with the said discharge of the accused persons by the learned Trial Court vide his order dated 24.08.2015, the State of Mizoram, the prosecution have preferred this Revision Petition under Section 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for setting aside the impugned discharge order dated 24.08.2015 and to pass necessary order with a direction to frame charges against the respondent accused persons on the basis of the charge sheet of the case filed by the Investigating Officer dated 26.11.2014.

7. Section 227 of the CrPC relates with discharge and Section 228 of the said code relates to framing of charge pertaining to warrant cases and it read as follows:

227. Discharge.

If, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is not sufficient gro