1 S.B.Criminal Revision Petition No.1083/2007 Smt. Pavni v. State of Rajasthan Date of Order :: 22nd January, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. Sandeep Mehta, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, Public Prosecutor. .... To quash the order dated 25.9.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Bali, this petition under Section 397 read with 401 Cr.P.C. is preferred. In brief, the factual matrix of the case is that one Shri Navaram submitted a complaint before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bali stating therein that on 7.5.2007 at about 12.30 P.M. his wife Teejo and daughter Vimla went to village well, where accused Pavni assaulted his wife with “faoda” and on being falling down Pavni sat over her and pressed her nose and mouth that resulted into death of Teejo. The complaint was sent for investigation to Station House Officer, Police Station, Falna and after regular investigation a charge sheet alleging commission of an offence under Section 304 part-II IPC was filed. By order impugned the charge under Section 304 part-II IPC was framed. 2 While assailing validity of framing of the charge as per provisions of Section 304 part-II IPC, the contention of counsel for the petitioner is that no evidence is available on record on basis of that it may be presumed that the death of Teejo occurred because of any act done by the petitioner with the knowledge that was likely to cause death. I have examined the entire record available. It is true that in the complaint it is stated by Navaram that the petitioner assaulted Teejo and pressed her nose and mouth, however, the cause of death by the medical board is “Neurogenic Shock”. In postmortem report also on thorax examination, lungs of deceased were healthy. The larynx and trathae were also found healthy. On body of deceased some marks of abrasion were found on toe and foot. The postmortem report and the medical opinion nowhere mention that the deceased suffered with suffocation or asphyxia. On the contrary, both the lungs and larynx of the deceased were found healthy. No injury was found on any part of the deceased to establish her death due to suffocation or because of non availability of oxygen to the lungs. The only cause given for the death is neurogenic shock. The evidence available on record discloses that the petitioner and the deceased entered into some 3 hot discussion on village well and they also logged horns during such discussions and deceased Teejo fell down. There is nothing on record on basis of that it can be said that the petitioner was having any knowledge that her act may cause death of Pavni. To constitute an offence under Section 304 part-II IPC death must be caused by the act of the accused with knowledge that it is likely to cause death. In the instant matter such knowledge is absolutely missing. Thus, framing of charge for an offence under Section 304 part-II IPC is absolutely unwarranted in present matter. This revision, therefore, is allowed. The order framing charge as per provisions of Section 304 part-II IPC is quashed. The trial court shall consider the police report and the documents annexed thereto afresh for framing appropriate charge as per the evidence available on record. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. Kkm/ps.