Point of Law: trial court while considering the discharge application is not to act as a mere post office. It can evaluate the evidence for a limited purpose to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to try the accused.

JUDGMENT :

1) This criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a criminal trial of FIR No.178/2014 for offences under Section 306, 304-B, 109 and 498-A RPC pending before the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu [“the trial court”], is directed against the order of the trial court dated 25.02.2015, whereby the trial court has framed charges against all the accused for commission of offences under Section 306, 304-B and 498-A RPC.

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2) The case of the prosecution pending before the trial court is that on 13th October, 2014, a telephonic information was received at Police Post, Gajansoo from Police Control Room, Jammu, that a lady, namely, Mst. Pooja Sharma W/o Santosh Kumar Sharma R/o Galbaday Chak, Tehsil and District Jammu, had been brought to Government Medical College, Jammu, as a poison case for medical treatment. The Police was informed that the lady Pooja Sharma was brought dead in the Government Medical College, Jammu and her body had been kept in the Mortuary Room of the hospital. On receipt of said information, the Police initiated proceedings under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. The Officer Incharge of Police Post, Gajansoo, along with other police officials rushed to Government Medical College, Jammu, and took possession of the dead body of the deceased in presence of her legal heirs and prepared farad maqboozgi naash on spot. After post-mortem, the dead body of the deceased was handed over to her legal heirs for last rites. Statements of witnesses under Section 175 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded and on the basis of statements of witnesses so recorded, commission of cognizable offences was made out. Accordingly, FIR No.178/2014 was registered and the investigation was entrusted to Incharge Police Post, Gajansoo. The Investigating Officer inspected the place of occurrence, prepared site plan and recorded statements of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. All the accused involved in the commission of offences were arrested. The statements of three material witnesses, namely, (1) Sonu Sharma S/o Sobha Ram R/o Nai Basti District Jammu, (2) Bawa Singh S/o Mela Ram Singh R/o Galbaday Chak, and (3) Mst. Bharti Sharma W/o Suraj Prakash Sharma, were got recorded under Section 164-A of Cr.P.C. The post-mortem report was obtained which proved that the deceased had died due to consuming of poisonous substance. On the basis of evidence collected during investigation, it came to fore that the case pertained to dowry demand and, accordingly, Section 498-A RPC was held proved and added in the case. Since the death of deceased had taken placed within seven years of marriage, the offence under Section 304-B RPC too was proved and added in the case. On completion of investigation, Investigating Officer concluded that all the six accused, the petitioners herein, had committed the offences under Section 304-B, 306, 498-A and 109 RPC. On 13th December, 2014, the police presented the charge sheet in terms of Section 173 of Cr.P.C before the concerned Magistrate and the matter was committed by the Magistrate to the Court of Sessions and the Sessions Court assigned the case to the trial court for disposal under law.

3) The matter was considered by the trial court for framing of charge and the trial court, after considering the rival contentions of both the sides and having gone through the charge sheet in its entirety, came to the conclusion that the charges under Section 306, 304-B and 498 RPC are required to be framed against all the accused. Accordingly, vide order impugned dated 25.02.2015, the formal charges for the aforesaid offences were framed and the trial was directed to commence on 18th March, 2015.

4) It is this order dated 25.02.2015 which is assailed by the accused in this revision petition. It may be worth-while to notice that the accused have also prayed in the alternative to treat this criminal revision petition as a petition under Section 561-A Cr.P.C and to quash the charges as well as