IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL REVISION NO.4 OF 2006 Chandra Prakash Joshi S/o Hiraballabh Joshi & two others ……… Revisionists Versus State of Uttaranchal …... Respondents Dated: 29th July, 2008 Sri Amit Kapri, Advocate holding brief of Smt. Pushpa Joshi, learned counsel for the revisionists. Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. GA for the State. HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This criminal revision, preferred under section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the order dated 6.1.2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh in S.T. No.19/05, State Vs. Chandra Prakash, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has framed the charge against the revisionists-Chandra Prakash Joshi, Smt. Jiwanti Devi and Km. Hansa Devi under Sections 498-A and 304-B of I.P.C. and in alternative under Section 306 of I.P.C. 2. Sri Amit Kapri, Advocate holding brief of Smt. Pushpa Joshi, learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri Harish Pujari, learned GA for the State are present. 3. Sri Amit Kapri, Advocate holding brief of Smt. Pushpa Joshi, learned counsel for the revisionists stated at bar that the present revision has been rendered infructuous and for this reason he does not want to press his revision. 2 4. Even otherwise, I have perused the order dated 6.1.2006 passed by the trial court. After considering the role assigned to the revisionists/accused in the commission of crime and also after perusing the other material available in the file, I am of the view that the trial court is justified in passing the order for framing the charge against the revisionists/accused persons for the offences punishable under Section 498-A and 304-B of I.P.C and in alternative under Section 306 of I.P.C. I do not find any illegality, impropriety or incorrectness in the said order. In my opinion, the trial court, on the basis of the evidence available on record, has rightly passed the order for framing the charge against the present revisionists. For the reasons recorded above, the revision is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. (Dharam Veer, J.) 29.07.2008 Rajeev Dang