HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4455 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 26.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C./OAW, District Jhansi, in S.T. No. 1093 of 2023, State Vs. Bittu @ Adarsh Pakhrey) arising out of Case Crime No. 262 of 2023, under Sections 376, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the order of framing charge is illegal and arbitrary and the same is not based on correct facts. The revisionist has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the revisionist was neither involved in the crime nor instrumentally administered poison to the victim rather, she herself consumed poison, but the revisionist has been unnecessarily blamed in the said crime. 4. Learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2 submitted that order of framing charge against the revisionist is in accordance with law. Learned trial court, while examining the entire facts on record has framed the charge against the revisionist, after affording reasonable opportunity to him. He further submitted that so far as framing the charge is concerned, the trial court has to see that a prima facie case is made out against the accused or not. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bittu Alias Adarsh Pakhrey .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is seen that the revisionist was heard by the court at the time of framing of charge and after hearing the parties, charge has been framed. It is settled law that, while framing of charge, the court has to consider and examine, whether prima facie case is made out against the person or not. However, the revisionist will have ample opportunity to defend his case and cross examine the witnesses during the course of trial. I am not inclined to interfere with the revision, the same being devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the revision stands dismissed. September 25, 2025 Gss CRLR No. 4455 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad