M.N. Bhandari, J. - (1.) By this petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 18.11.2014, framing charge against the petitioner for offence under Section 506 IPC. A further challenge is made to the order dated 31.03.2015, whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that charge has been framed in ignorance of Section 245 Cr.P.C. In the pre-charge evidence, material was not brought, which may lead to conviction, if it remains unrebutted. In absence of evidence, the court below committed grave illegality in framing charge for the offence under Section 506 IPC.
(3.) Referring to complaint, he submits that a telephonic call was said to have been received by the complainant-non-petitioner where he was given threatening. The complaint discloses telephone number from where threatening was given. To confirm the call, complainant dialled said number immediately. The call was found from telephone booth. The operator of the telephone booth informed about the call by some one five minutes back but who was the person is not coming out from the complaint and the evidence led by the parties. The voice is not recognised by the non-petitioner, otherwise he would not have called the number from where call was received. In absence of evidence, framing of charge is in ignorance of Section 245 Cr.RC.;