S.C.Agarwal - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Dinesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 25.5.2011 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Azamgarh as well as order dated 28.8.2010 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No. 10, Azamgarh in case No. 2679 of 2005 (Hari Lal v. Ram Awadh and others) under Sections 498-AIPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Belwaria, District Azamgarh. The case was proceeding under Section 494 IPC. During the course of hearing, the trial Court decided to frame additional charge under Sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners filed revision, which has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on the basis of same evidence, earlier cognizance was taken for the offence under Section 494 IPC, and on the basis of same evidence, new charge cannot be added. Section 216 Cr.P.C. provides that any Court may alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced.
(3.) FROM the evidence recorded under Section 244 Cr.P.C, the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act was also disclosed and, therefore, the impugned orders cannot be said to be unjustified or illegal. However, after framing of the additional charge, the petitioners shall be entitled to recall the witnesses for further cross-examination. With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed.;