Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned order.
This application in revision is directed against the order dated 02.02.2011 passed by Special Judge, S.C/S.T. Act, Agra by which he has rejected the application 11 B filed by the revisionist in S.S.T. No. 13 of 2010 (State Versus Shahid @ Bhopali).
After having examined the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist, perused the impugned order and other materials brought on record, I find that the Court below after taking into consideration the entire evidence came to the conclusion that there was sufficient grounds for proceeding against the revisionist and for framing charge against him under Section 307, 324, 504 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has failed to demonstrate that the impugned order suffers from any illegality or infirmity warranting any interference by this Court. No case for interference with the impugned order is made out at this stage. However, since the charge can be altered or amended at any stage of trial, the revisionist may raise all the ground which have been taken by him in this application in revision during trial at the appropriate stage.
Subject to the aforesaid observation, this application in revision is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 23.2.2011 arun