The court possesses wide-ranging, discretionary power under criminal law to add or alter charges at any time before the pronouncement of judgment, provided such action is based on material evidence and ensures a fair trial without causing undue prejudice to the accused.

JUDGMENT :

NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to set aside the order dated 10.02.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-Ist, (Offence Against Women) Mathura in S.T. No. 41 of 2017 under sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Case Crime No. 1073 of 2015, Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura.

3. Briefly stated, Shri Krishan Sharma, the opposite party no.2, lodged an FIR bearing Case Crime No. 1073 of 2015 under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura against the applicant and 3 others alleging that the marriage of his daughter Km. Kshama was solemnized with the applicant, Arun Sharma on 19.02.2011 wherein cash of Rs. 3 lacs and various articles were given but the in-laws demanded additional dowry of Rs. 5 lacs cash and a four wheeler. Due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand, the daughter of opposite party no.2 was killed on 04.11.2015 at 2.00 P.M. at her matrimonial home. After thorough investigation, the applicant was charge-sheeted under sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. According to the autopsy report dated 05.11.2015, no ante mortem injuries were found as the cause of death could not be ascertained, the viscera was preserved.

4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura took cognizance on 08.02.2016 and the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions and the charges were framed against the applicant on 05.07.2018 under sections 498A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. During the trial proceedings, total eight prosecution witnesses have been examined and the statement of the accused/applicant was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C on 09.07.2025 and the date was fixed for final arguments. The viscera of the deceased was preserved on 04.11.2015 and was sent for chemical examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Agra on 17.12.2015 and was chemically examined on 22.12.2016.

5. In the meantime, taking a somersault, the ADGC (Crl.) moved an Application No. 82 Kha dated 05.12.2025 for taking viscera report on record and to frame an alternate charge under Section 302 IPC. The objection was invited on the said application wherein the applicant filed the objection dated 13.01.2026 and the application was allowed vide impugned order dated 10.02.2026, passed by learned Addl. Session Judge/Fast Track Court I (Atrocities against Women) Mathura by taking viscera report dated 22.12.2016 on record, and fixed the date for framing of the alternate charge under section 302 IPC.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order dated 10.02.2026 is arbitrary and illegal and is not sustainable in the eyes of law. It has further been argued that the learned Trial Court had committed gross illegality by taking viscera report dated 22.12.2016 on record at the stage of final argument i.e. after closing of eight prosecution witnesses and recording the statement of accused-applicant under section 313 Cr.P.C. and the same could not be taken on record at such a belated stage. 7. It has further been argued that the viscera report dated 22.12.2016 has been placed before the Trial Court on 05.12.2025 with an inordinate delay of ten years without any plausible explanation given by the prosecution. No opportunity of cross-examination was given to the applicant, therefore, the same cannot be read in evidence or made part of the prosecution evidence by the Trial Cour