MUHAMMAD FAROOQ Versus State

ORDER

1. SADAQAT HUSSAIN RAJA, J.--- The captioned revision petition has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction, Sudhnuti/Pallandri, dated 09.08.2009.

2. The precise facts of the case are that on report of Muhammad Raees Khan FIR No.145/07 has been registered against the accused appellant herein, in the offence under section 322, A.P.C. at Police Station Pallandri/Sudhnooti, on 04.09.2007. The police after investigation submitted challan before the District Criminal Court Pallandri, on 16.07.2008. The statement of the accused under section 242, Cr.P.C. was recorded on 23.09.2008. The accused pleaded not guilty whereupon the prosecution was asked to lead evidence. On 07.5.2009 the complainant moved an application for amendment in the statement recorded under section 242, Cr.P.C. On 22.06.2009, accused filed objections on the application. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties vide impugned judgment and order dated 05.08.2009, accepted the application, hence, the captioned revision petition.

3. I have heard the learned Advocates for the parties, who have reiterated the grounds taken in their respective pleadings and gone through the record of the case.

4. The stand of the accused appellant is that Makhan Jan committed suicide, hence, the accused cannot be proceeded in the offence under section 302, P.C., therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set-aside, whereas the stance of the other side is that from the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded by the police under section 161, Cr.P.C. it appears that the accused appellant has committed the murder of Makhan Jan, hence, he has to face trial under section 302, A.P.C. section 227, Cr.P.C. empowers the Court to alter or add the charge at any time before judgment. Section 227, Cr.P.C. is hereby reproduced as under:-

5. "227. Court may alter charge (i) Any Court may alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced."

6. It is clear from the plain reading of aforesaid reproduced section that the Court may alter or add the charge at any time. The Court can alter or add the charge on the application of a party or its own. However, Court cannot change the section without providing an opportunity of hearing to the accused. In the instant case, the respondents filed an application before the trial Court and the trial Court after hearing the parties passed the impugned order.

7. It may be stated here that if after recording of the evidence and at the conclusion of trial it is proved that the accused appellant has not committed the murder of deceased and it is proved that she died due to some act of the accused then the Court has the power to convict or acquit him in the offence. Mere conversion of section 322, P.C. into 302, P.C. does not affect any right of the accused. Moreover the Court is not bound by the report submitted by the police and is not powerless to try an accused under section 302, P.C. who has been challaned under section 322, P.C., therefore, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the trial Court while passing the impugned order, which is hereby maintained.

8. In view of above, finding no force in this petition, the same stands dismissed. The case is sub-judice before the trial Court since 2008. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the same within four months from the date of receiving this order.

9. HBT/22/Sh.C.(AJ&K) Petition dismissed.