SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- G.B. Pattanaik and U.C. Banerjee, JJ.

Crl. Appeal No. 761-762 of 2000 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1559-1560 of 2000). D/d. 4.9.2000

State of J&K - Appellant

Versus

Abdul Ahad Sheikh - Respondent

For the Appellant :- None.

For the Respondent :- None.

Indian Penal Code, Sections 302 and 304 Part-I - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sections 239, 240 and 482 - Case at the stage of framing charge - High Court cannot alter the charge from 302 Indian Penal Code to 304 Part I Indian Penal Code in exercise of its power under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - High Court has gone beyond its jurisdiction by trying to shift the evidence and examining the defence plea.

[Paras 2 and 3]

JUDGMENT

U.C. Banerjee, J. - Leave granted.

2. The State of J&K is in appeal against the impugned order of the learned Single Judge of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court, who by the impugned judgment at the stage of framing of charge, has altered the charge from Section 302 Indian Penal Code to one under Section 304, Part-I, on a finding that the accused must be said to have committed the offence because of sudden quarrel and the injury was not caused with an intention to cause death.

3. A bare perusal of the judgment would indicate that the High Court at the stage of framing of charge, has gone beyond its jurisdiction by trying to shift the evidence and examining the defence plea and ultimately, altering the charge framed. The parameters for exercise of power under Section 482 against an order of framing of charge have now been said (stated ?) in several decisions of this Court and the impugned order does not conform to the said parameters. In this view of the matter, the impugned order of the High Court is set aside and the accused is directed to face the charge under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. The Criminal Appeals stand disposed of accordingly.

State Appeals allowed.