- (1.) The present Criminal Revision has been preferred against the order impugned passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Godda in Sessions Case No. 260 of 2006 on 5.7.2006 whereby and whereunder the charge was directed to be framed against the petitioners under Sections 147, 341 and 303/149, IPC without considering the petition preferred by the petitioners under Section 228, Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) The specific case of the petitioners was that under the facts and circumstances, no offence was made out against any of them under Section 307, IPC and therefore, the charge under Section 307 was not maintainable according to the charge-sheet filed after investigation by the police.
(3.) I find from the order impugned that the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners under Section 228, Cr PC was not considered by the trial Court as there was even no reference of any petition to that effect and in this manner the Court below has committed irregularity. Whenever any petition under Section 227 or 228, Cr PC is filed, it is incumbent upon the Court concerned to discuss the prima facie case for arriving at that prima facie case was made out but in the instant case by the order impugned the Court below failed to discharge such obligation and hence the order impugned is not maintainable accordingly it is set aside. The Court concerned is directed to pass a reasoned order on the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners under Section 228, Cr PC wihin a month after hearing afresh.;