- (1.) THE order dated 17th November, 2012 framing charge under Sections 498A/34 and under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and in the alternative under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code has been challenged.
(2.) MR . Mitra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the materials on record do not justify framing of charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submitted that the instant case was one of suicide and allegation of forcible administration of poison is incorrect. He submitted that there was no torture for dowry.
(3.) MR . Ghose, appearing for the State opposed the application. I choose not to go into the factual controversy which has to be decided on the basis of evidence adduced in course of trial. Framing of charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and alternatively under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, in my view, does not cause prejudice to the petitioner inasmuch as even if one of the head of charge is quashed, the forum or manner of - trial remains the same. It is trite law that merely because the charge is framed, conviction is not a necessary corolla. Prosecution has to prove its case in accordance with law subject of course to statutory presumptions as available under law.;