The importance of scrutinizing the allegations and material available on record at the time of framing charges, and the need for deep scrutiny of charges during the course of trial.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.

1. Heard Sri Shiv Ram Tewari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Aniruddha Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State.

2. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

“(i) To set aside the entire criminal proceedings of S.T. No. 156 of 2022 (State vs. Kamlesh Kumar and Others) pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Shrawasti arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 337, 393, 152, 323, 307, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 7 of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1932, Police Station-Gilaula, District-Shrawasti along with cognizance order dated 28.07.2021 and the Charge-sheet dated 30.06.2021, so far as it relates to the present petitioners, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this petition.

(ii) To set aside the impugned order dated 23.05.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shrawasti, as contained in Annexure No. 5 to this petition.

(iii) To say the further proceedings of S.T. No. 156 of 2022 (State vs. Kamlesh Kumar and others) pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Shrawasti.

(iv) Any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem just, fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.”

3. Attention has been drawn towards the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) dated 16.04.2021 whereby the false and misconceived allegations have been levelled against the petitioners by one Inspector Incharge, Sri Kamla Kant Tripathi, the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also stated that so far as the allegations relating to Section 307 and 393 I.P.C. are concerned, there is no iota of evidence and material to suggest that those offences have, prima-facie, made out. However, the investigation in question has been conducted in a cursory manner without collecting the relevant material and without recording the statements of the concerning persons filed the impugned charge-sheet under various sections including Sections 307 and 393 I.P.C.

5. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No. 6 of the petition, which is examination of Inspector Incharge, Sri Kamla Kant Tripathi, the informant wherein he has himself stated that he was not present on the spot when the alleged incident has taken place but the Sub-Inspector Sri Kuldeep Rai and Sri Santosh Kumar were present. The Inspector Incharge has further stated that when he reached at the place, he saw that the public property has been damaged and such damage has been seen by the informant himself along with his other officials. He has further stated that he is not sure as to whether the bricks/stones have been recovered from the place. However, there is no mention of that fact in the recovery memo.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has therefore submitted that despite the aforesaid fact when the charge under various sections including Sections 307 & 393 I.P.C. have been framed, which have prima-facie not made out on the basis of material and evidence available, an application for deletion of the charge under Section 307 I.P.C. has been filed before the learned trial court concerned and the learned trial court in a mechanical manner, without appreciating the legal and factual arguments rejected such application vide order dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure No. 5). The aforesaid application was rejected mainly on the ground that at the time of framing charges the trial court does not scrutinize all the material and evidences in detail inasmuch as such material/evidence is scrutinized during the course of trial but only on the basis of material available on record, on the basis of prima-facie opinion the charge/charges is/are framed. The learned trial court has further indicated that since the medical examination report of the police personnel is available on the record, therefore, at the time of fra