1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision. No. 2395-M of 2008 (O&M). Date of Decision: 18.8.2009 *** Karamjeet Singh .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. H.N.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The challenge in this revision petition is to the order dated 8.9.2008 and charge sheet of even date, under which charges under Sections 304, 337, 427 IPC have been framed against the petitioner by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Bathinda. The order has been impugned on various grounds including that the case does not fall within the ambit of Section 304 IPC and at most it is a case of rash and negligent driving, attracting provisions under Section 304- A IPC. Therefore, the Court below has erred in framing the charges under Section 304 IPC against the petitioner. That apart, it has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that much has been argued before the learned trial during the course of arguments on the point of framing of charge in respect of the petitioner, but none of the contentions have been discussed. The impugned order, as annexed with the petition, reads as under:- “File received by entrustment. It be registered. Arguments heard. A prima facie case for offence punishable u/s 304, 337, 427 of the IPC made out 2 against the accused, for which he has been charged, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, accordingly Pws be summoned for 8.9.2008. ” A bare perusal of the impugned order shows that there is no discussion with regard to what has been argued on behalf of the present petitioner. No doubt, at the stage of framing of charges only prima facie has to be seen by the Court, but the order must have indication that the Court has applied its mind prior to ordering for framing of charges under relevant provisions of law. However, in the instant case the order, as reproduced above, is a non-speaking one and cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order as also the charge-sheet, are set aside. It is directed that the learned trial court shall pass orders on charge afresh, after hearing the parties, on merits and without being influenced from any observation made hereinabove. The parties to appear before the learned trial court on 11.9.2009. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE August 18,2009 Jiten