- (1.) By way of this revision, the accused petitioners have approached this Court for challenging the order dated 7.8.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Sessions Case No.26/2014 whereby the learned trial Judge directed framing of charges against the petitioners for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C.
(2.) Facts in brief are that the respondent complainant Gautam lodged a complaint in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh on 16.11.2009 alleging inter-alia that the accused Onkar, Jeevani, Jhamku, Lalu, Ramju and Prabhu Lal murdered his wife Smt.Kali Bai on 1.10.2009 after conspiring amongst themselves. His wife had gone to take care of his goats at his agricultural field and her dead body was found in the well, the next morning. It was alleged in the complaint that the accused persons were carrying enmity with the complainant and his wife owing to some land dispute. The accused persons forcibly dug a well on the land of the complainant and also constructed a house thereupon. They threatened the complainant's wife that she would be killed. Numerous injuries were seen on the dead body of Smt.Kali. On 16.11.2009, when the complainant was going to his house from his well, the accused Prabhu and Ramju accosted him and threatened that he should leave the village or else he would meet the same fate which had been befallen his wife, who had been killed by them. The complainant alleged that he had lodged a report with the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh on 27.10.2009 but no action was taken thereupon. The said complaint was forwarded to the Police Station Pratapgarh for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. where F.I.R. No.133/2009 was registered and investigation commenced. After conclusion of investigation, a negative Final Report was submitted in the court concerned. The learned Magistrate proceeded to take cognizance against the accused for the offences under Sections 302 and 120B I.P.C. and the case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, who directed framing of charge against the accused persons for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C . by the order dated 7.8.2015 which is challenged in this revision.
(3.) Shri Rahul Bathi learned counsel representing the petitioners vehemently urged that ex-facie there is no material worth in the name on entire record so as to connect the petitioners with the alleged murder of Smt.Kali. The complaint was filed by the complainant Gautam on 16.11.2009 i.e. after more than 1 1/2 months of the incident. He urged that even in this belated complaint, apart from a vague allegation against the accused Prabhu and Ramju that they threatened the complainant of dire consequences if he did not leave the property and go away from the village, there is hardly any material or evidence which could justify framing of charge against the accused for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. He contended that the learned trial court was totally unjustified in drawing conjectural inferences from the circumstances noticed at the well from where, the dead body of Smt.Kali was recovered without prejudice to the argument that the death was accidental, he contended that even if it is assumed that the death of Smt.Kali was homicidal, then too, there is no evidence whatsoever on the record to point out that the accused petitioners were responsible for the alleged murder of Smt.Kali. He contended that the charge could not have been framed against the accused petitioners on mere conjectures and surmises and implored the Court to quash the impugned order while accepting revision.;