K. L. SHRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is directed against the under dated 6-2-87 passed by the first Additional Sessions Judge Dhar in S. T. No. 27/87 framing charge under S. 302, I. P. C. against the petitioner.

( 2 ) CIRCUMSTANCES giving rise to this petition are these. According to the prosecution story on 7-10-86 Kailash son of the present petitioner administered poison to his wife Bhartibai. Her dying declaration was recorded on 8-10-86 in which she named her husband Kailash as the culprit.

( 3 ) ON the report being lodged, a crime was registered and investigation was set afoot.

( 4 ) AT the conclusion of the investigation, the said Kailash and the present petitioner have both been prosecuted for offence under S. 302, IPC and charges have been framed against them. ( 5 ) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has seriously erred in framing charge under S. 302, IPC against the petitioner.

( 6 ) THE contention of the learned counsel for the State is that revision against order framing charge is not maintainable and that at any rate, on the material on record, the charge is clearly sustainable.

( 7 ) SECTI

Click Here to Read the rest of this document