Ravindra Singh, J. - (1.) THIS appli cation has been filed by the applicants Brij Bhushan @ Birju, Bobby @ Sudhir and Sanjeev with a prayer to quash the charge dated 31.10.2008 under section 302 IPC framed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Meerut in S.T. No. 489 of 2007.
(2.) HEARD Sri H.C. Mishra, learned Counsel for the applicant and the leaned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. The facts in brief of this case are that the FIR of this case has been lodged by O.P. No. 2 in case crime No. 97 of 2006 un der section 302 IPC at P.S. Saroorpur Dis trict Meerut on 1.4.2006 at 10.00 p.m. in respect of the incident which had allegedly occurred on 1.4.2006 at about 7.00 p.m. in which the applicants were named as accused. On 7.7.2006 the O.P. No. 2 gave an application to the Officer In charge of the P.S. Saroorpur stating therein that the de ceased was murdered by Pawan Gupta, the names of the applicants were mentioned in the FIR due to mistake. The I.O. recorded the statement of the first informant on 8.9.2006, thereafter I.O. recorded the state ment of some other witnesses also who came to the conclusion that the offence was committed by Satyendra alias Billu and not by the applicants therefore the charge-sheet was submitted only against Satyendra alias Billu. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and the case was committed to the Court of session, the charge was framed only against Satyendra alias Billu. The statements of P.W- 1 Ramesh and P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 have been recorded by the Trial Court, thereafter from the side of the prosecution an appli cation under section 319 Cr.P.C. has been filed, the same has been allowed on 21.7.2008 by which the applicants have been summoned to face the trial. Thereaf ter, the learned Trial Court has framed the charge against the applicant on 31.10.2008 being aggrieved from the order dated 31.10.2008, the present application has been filed. It is contended by the Counsel for the applicant that in the present case the conviction on the basis of the statement of P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 is not possible because the first informant himself has given the statement during investigation stating therein that the applicants were falsely implicated and without giving proper reason the learned Trial Court has allowed the application under section 319 Cr.P.C. on 21.7.2008. The order dated 21.7, 2008 is illegal. Subsequently the charge framed under section 302 IPC by the Trial Court on 31, 10.2008 is also illegal, the same may be set aside.
(3.) IN reply to the above contention, it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that in exercise of the power conferred under sec tion 319 Cr.P.C. the Trial Court has sum moned the applicants after considering the statements of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 according to their statements specific allegations of committing the murder by using firearm has been made against the applicants. The learned Trial Court has not committed any error in summoning the applicants on 21.7.2008 and the learned Trial Court has not committed any error in framing the charges on 31.10.2008. it is further submitted that on the basis of the statements of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3, if relied, conviction may be done. The present application is devoid of merits and may be dismissed. Considering the submission made by the learned Counsel for the applicant; the learned A.G.A. and from the perusal of the impugned order dated 31.10.2008, it appears that the learned Trial Court has framed the charge under section 302 IPC after considering the statement of the wit nesses of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 on which the learned Trial Court has summoned the applicant in exercise of the power con ferred under section 319 Cr.P.C., the above witnesses have made specific allegation of committing the murder against the appli cants. There is no illegality in framing of the charge, therefore, the prayer for quashing the order dated 31.10.2008 is re fused. Accordingly this application is dis missed.;