D.K. Sinha, J. - (1.) PURSUANT to the order dated 15.1.2010 the report of the office is on the record from which I find that concerned dealing assistant has regretted for his ignorance. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that he has filed supplementary affidavit bringing certified copy of the impugned order dated 30.3.2009 on the record by which charge was framed against the petitioners under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code in S.T. No. 344 of 2008 arising out of Chhatarpur P.S. Case No. 61 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. No. 660 of 2008 by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. III Palamau.
(2.) THIS Criminal revision is directed against order impugned dated 30.3.2009 passed by the said court by which the charge was framed against the petitioners under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code which was read over and explained to the accused -petitioners in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The learned Counsel assailed the order impugned on the ground that it was a non -speaking order and was passed without application of judicial mind.
(3.) THE facts of the case, in brief, was that the informant Harihar Saw presented his statements before the police on 26.4.2008 stating inter alia that he married his daughter Urmila Devi with Jwala Prasad Sao but he was informed on the date of his statements that his daughter committed suicide by hanging. On such information, when he arrived to the matrimonial home of Urmila Devi he found that the dead body of his daughter was hanging there. In course of interrogation with the neighbouring people the informant came to know that his daughter Urmila Devi was mentally and physically tortured by her husband and other in -laws and in same sequence after committing her murder the accused persons hanged her body with the help of rope. Genesis of the occurrence was that the deceased used to oppose the misconduct of her husband Jwala Prasad Saw who had illicit relation with the wife of his elder brother which caused altercation between the husband and wife in a routine manner. The informant had tried to resolve the disputes as well as the issues by convening a Panchayati in his village but the husband -petitioner Jwala Prasad Saw did not participate in the said Panchayati and ultimately occurrence was given effect to.;