-1- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4210 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO.4210 OF 2007 APPLICATION NO.4210 OF 2007 Abdul Sattar Mansurali Shaikh ...Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.C.K.Talekar for the Applicant Ms A.A.Mane A.P.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE,J. DATE DATE DATE : JUNE 13, 2008. : JUNE 13, 2008. : JUNE 13, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 10th September 2007 whereby the application filed by the Petitioner has been dismissed. The learned A.P.P. states that the charge has already been framed and the summonses have already been issued. 2. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner contends that the offence under section 304 has not been made out and at best the charge could be framed under section 304-A and not under section 304. He submits that the victims’ huts had collapsed due to heavy rain on 26th July 2005 due to a landslide. The huts were constructed by the Applicant but he had no intention to cause death nor was he responsible for the death of the victims, contends the learned advocate. 3. In my opinion, if it is found during the course of trial that the charge should be altered it is always open for the trial court to do so. In these circumstances, there is no need to interfere with the order. Rejected. -2- * * * * *