Full Judgment
CRR No.1792/2011 Criminal Revision No.1792/2011 14.3.2013 Shri A.
Usmani, counsel for the applicants.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent.
As prayed, heard the learned counsel for the parties finally.
The applicants have move the present revision against the order dated 17.9.2011 passed by the learned FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in S.T.No.567/2010, whereby the charges of offence punishable under section 307 or 307 read with section 149 of IPC were framed against the applicants alongwith other charges.
The prosecution's case, in short, is that, on 6.3.2009, at about 10 p.m.in the evening, Head constable Jugalkishore Mishra of Police Station Rahatgarh had received an information that in a truck, which was going towards Rahatgarh, was having some agricultural cattle and therefore, he and constable Munnalal chased that truck.
At Jhanda chowk, Rahatgarh, truck was stopped and the applicants surrounded the Head constable Jugalkishore and constable Munnalal and thereafter, they assaulted both the police officials.
CRR No.1792/2011 When other persons came to rescue them, thereafter, the applicants ran away.
After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the applicants only challenged the charge of offence punishable under section 307 or 307 read with section 149 of IPC.
If the medical reports of the victims Jugalkishore and Munnalal are perused then, it is apparent that Jugalkishore sustained some injuries on shoulder, elbow, knees, back and other not vital parts of the body, whereas, no bony injury was found to him.
Similarly, Munnalal sustained simple injuries on head, nose, back, waist, hands and feet but, no bony injury was found.
Though bleeding was found from the Nos.of the victim Munnalal but, no symptom of brain hemorrhage was found.
Under such circumstances, where 8 accused persons assaulted the victim and they caused only 4-5 injuries to each of the victims then, it would be apparent that they did not assault them in a forceful manner or they did not assault for more than twice.
Under such circumstances, looking to the overt-act of the applicants, it is apparent that they had not intended to kill the victiMs.CRR No.1792/2011 Similarly, it is not at all established that the victims sustained any fatal injury.
Under such circumstances, no ingredients of section 307 of IPC is visible in the present case and therefore, no offence punishable under section 307 of IPC shall be made out either directly or with help of section 149 of IPC.
At the most, offence punishable under section 332 of IPC shall constitute against the applicants either directly or with help of section 149 of IPC.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge has committed an error of law in framing the charges of offence punishable under section 307 of IPC and therefore, it is a fit case, in which an interference is required from the side of this Court, by way of a revision.
Consequently, the present revision filed by the applicants is hereby allowed.
The order dated 17.9.2012 passed by the learned FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar is hereby set aside upto the extend so far it relates to charge for offence punishable under section 307 or 307 read with section 149 of IPC.
The applicants are discharged from the charges of offence punishable under section 307 or 307 read with section 149 of IPC.
Remaining trial does not remain to be CRR No.1792/2011 exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions and therefore, it is directed that the learned FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge may proceed under section 228 of the Cr.P.C.A copy of the order be sent to the trial Court for information and compliance.
(N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE Pushpendra