HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5370 of 2024 Court No. - 90 HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned counsel for opp. party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State. 2. The instant revision has been filed against the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), Shamli in S.T. No. 893 of 2022( State Vs. Ashok and others), whereby the discharge application of the revisionist has been dismissed 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that, so far as alleged injury of deceased is concerned, no such injury has been noted on the person of the deceased and cause of death as explained in postmortem report is cardiac arrest as a result of myocardial infraction. Learned counsel further submitted that, had there been injuries noted or found on the person of the deceased, the case would have been different. However in the absence of any injury, so caused and the cause of death, in post mortem report, is shown cardiac arrest as a result of myocardial infraction, the revisionist cannot be blamed for causing the death of the deceased, who is brother of opp. party no. 2. He further submits that death of deceased be referred as natural death. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for opp. party no. 2 submitted that the deceased was assaulted by the accused persons, while deceased and his brother were preparing agricultural field for sowing crops. There was Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Onkar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Aditya Gupta, G.A., Harsh Vardhan Gupta Pradeep And 4 Others .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) some dispute also with regard to landed property between the parties. 5. Having considered the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and a perusal of the order dated 06.09.2024 reveals that the cause of death has been shown "cardiac arrest as a result of myocardial infraction". Learned trial court has further gone to the extent that the explanation mentioned cardiac arrest, as a result of myocardial infraction which shows as "Infarction is tissue death (necrosis) due to inadequate blood supply to the affected area. It may be caused by artery blockages, rupture, mechanical compression, or vasoconstriction. The resulting lession is referred to as an infarct (from the Latin infarctus, "stuffed into"). 6. At this stage, at the time of framing of charge, the court has to see prima facie case and entire disputed facts cannot be discussed in detail here. However, the revisionists will have another opportunity to lead the evidence during the course of trial in respect of the medical report/ post mortem report, as well as cross examination of witnesses. As a result, no case is made out for setting aside the impugned order dated 06.09.2024. The revision being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed. 7. It is accordingly dismissed. October 13, 2025 Gss CRLR No. 5370 of 2024 2 (Harvir Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad