Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010092842019 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet. 454/2019 1:AMIT KUMAR MAHASETH S/O SHIVAJI MAHASETH, R/O BASID COMPLEX, NEAR ULUBARI FLYOVER, GUWAHATI-07, KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:SHIVNATH SHAH S/O LT. SUKHDEO SHAH R/O TARUN NAGAR LANE NO.8 HOUSE NO. 12 GUWAHATI-781005 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. [ENTITY] Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY] ORDER
03.05.2019 Heard Mr. [ENTITY], learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. [ENTITY], learned Addl. P.P., Assam, appearing for the State.
Page No.# 2/3 This revision petition has been filed assailing the order dated 12.02.2019 by means of which the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati had framed charge against the petitioner under [SECTION] [ACT] in connection with [CASE NUMBER].
Mr. [ENTITY] submits that there were no materials available before the learned court below to frame charge against the petitioner under [SECTION] [ACT]. Mr. [ENTITY] has placed reliance on two decisions of the Supreme Court viz., in the case of [PRECEDENT] and in [PRECEDENT] to submit that cogent material is required to be furnished so as to prove the charge of abatement to commit suicide under [SECTION] [ACT] but in the present case no such material is available.
After going through the materials available on record, I am unable to agree with the submission of Mr. [ENTITY], learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that there is nothing on record permitting the learned trial court to frame charge agains the petitioner under [SECTION] [ACT]. It must, however, be borne in mind that for the purpose of framing charge the learned court below is only required to record a satisfaction as regards existence of a prima facie case. Whether the charge is proved against the accused by adducing proper evidence on record would be a matter of trial and the said aspect of the matter cannot be considered at this stage. In order to avoid any prejudice being caused to the petitioner no further observation/discussion in the matter is deemed necessary at this stage. The decisions relied upon by the petitioner's counsel would not have any application in the facts and circumstances of the Page No.# 3/3 present case.
For the reason stated above, this revision petition is held to be devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant