In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.Rev.No.2695 of 2008 Date of decision: 20.1.2010 Ajay Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.V.P.Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.H.S.Beniwal, DAG, Haryana. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order dated 7.10.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, whereby charge was framed against the petitioner under Sections 304/ 325 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC” for short) in FIR No.144 dated 17.4.2008 registered at Police Station City Fatehabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order was a non speaking order and hence, is liable to be set aside. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed this petition. Crl.Rev.No.2695 of 2008 -2- As per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner was driving canter bearing No.HR-61-6919 on the alleged day of occurrence at a high speed and struck against 8-10 passengers, who were standing near Mahindra pick up Nos. HR-22C-7083 and HR- 23B-8630, on their own side. As a result of this, three persons namely, Lichma Devi, Amit and Chinki died and Ajay Kumar suffered injuries. After completion of investigation, challan was presented under Sections 279/ 338/ 427 and 304 IPC. Learned Additional Sessions Judge finding that a prima facie case existed against the petitioner under Sections 304/ 325 IPC, ordered that the charge be framed against the accused under these Sections for the said offence. At a stage of framing of the charge, the trial Court is only required to see whether a prima facie case exists against the petitioner or not for the purposes of framing of the charge. The defence taken by the petitioner will be taken into consideration at the appropriate stage. Hence, no ground for interference is made out. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE January 20, 2010 anita