HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1168 of 2024 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and learned counsel for opp. party no.2. 2. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 14.12.2023 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Badaun in S.T.No. 550 of 2023, State Vs. Somveer and others, by which the charge has been framed against the revisionists (two in number) under Section 302/34 I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that the said charge has been framed on the application moved by the informant stating therein, that the case under Section 302 I.P.C. is to be made out, in the facts and circumstances of the case. It has further been submitted that initially the FIR No. 0265 of 2022 was lodged under Section 304 I.P.C. alleging therein that the deceased was allegedly beaten and assaulted by the accused persons, based on the circumstances, FIR under Section 304 I.P.C. was lodged. However, learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that, as a consequence of the injuries caused to the deceased, the injured (deceased) was declared dead by the doctor in the hospital, and the charge has falsely been altered from Section 304 I.P.C. to Section 302 I.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the revisionists further submitted that, as per Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Bharat Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi, Dharmendra Kumar Mishra, G.A., Neeraj Kumar Yadav, Rajeev Singh, Ravi Shukla Somveer And Another .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) injuries inflicted upon the deceased, it is not a case which falls within the meaning and definition of Section 302 I.P.C. It has further been submitted that, if the entire material on record is considered, which was collected during the course of investigation, the case will not fall within the meaning of Section 302 I.P.C. He further submits that even charge under Section 302 I.P.C., which was to be framed under Section 304 I.P.C., is not made out at all, as the revisionists have no role to play in causing injuries to the deceased, which ultimately led to his death (deceased). 5. Learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2 submitted that the death of the deceased has been caused consequence to the injuries inflicted on the person of deceased, as the deceased was assaulted and beaten up brutally and mercilessly and presuming that the deceased had died, then the assailants left the place of the incident. While taking him to hospital, the deceased succumbed to his injuries. According to post mortem report, the cause of death of the deceased is shown, as shock and hemorrhage, as a result of ante-mortem injuries. 6. Learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2 further submitted that, so far as the nature of evidence and injury is concerned, the same is subject matter of trial and the trial is at the advanced stage and most of the witnesses have already been examined therefore, no interference is called for by the Court, at this stage. 7. Having regard to the contentions made on behalf of the parties, it is a matter of record that, charge under Section 302 has already been framed against the revisionists-accused persons and trial is at the verge of completion, as informed by the learned counsel for opp. party no. 2 and most of witnesses have already been examined. Be that, as it may, since the trial has already commenced, the trial is at the advanced stage and the statements of the accused persons are to be recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. before passing of the judgement in the said trial and as far as the case, whether the same is made out under Section 302 or 304 I.P.C. is concerned, it is open to the revisionists, based upon the quality of the evidence and material on record, take up the same at the time of recording the statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, the revisionists shall be at liberty to submit their defence CRLR No. 1168 of 2024 2 during arguments, prior to the stage of passing the judgment and if that is so, the learned court after due consideration of the matter and being satisfied shall pass the order depending on the basis of evidence, whether the said case is made out under Section 304 or 302 I.P.C., the same is subject matter of trial. 8. 8. However, it shall remain open to the learned trial court to arrive at appropriate finding with regard to evidence, which may come on record during trial. No interference is required in the order under challenge. 9. The revision is, accordingly, disposed of. September 23, 2025 Gss CRLR No. 1168 of 2024 3 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad