Further hearing is taken up.

2. The order of the learned XVIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Meerut framing additional charge under Section 302 I. P. C. in S. T. No. 1125 of 1999 has been assailed by the petitioner, ac cused in the aforesaid case. It is contended by Sri Mishra that after trial was concluded both parties commenced argument and on the adjournment date a petition was moved on behalf of the prosecution for alteration of charge. It was contended that evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution disclosed commission of mur der punishable under Section 302 I. P. C. Upon hearing the learned trial Judge ac cepted the contention of the prosecution and framed charge under Section 302 I. P. C. It is strenuously contended by Sri Mishra that looking to the materials available in the case diary, charges were framed under Sections 498-A, 306 and 201 and 201 I. P. C. According to the prosecution the deceased committed suicide and the petitioner abated the commission of the said offence punishable under Section I. P. C. So far as charge under Sections 498-A and 201 I. P. C. are concerned there is no dispute by either side. The only question involved is whethe