Judgment:
CRR No.2019/2012 Criminal Revision No.2019/2012 12.3.2013 Shri Madan Singh, counsel for the applicants.
Shri P.C.Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent.
Heard on admission.
The applicants have challenged the order dated 27.7.2012 passed by the learned FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh in S.T.No.354/2011, whereby the charges of offence punishable under section 307 read with section 34 (3 counts).323, 148, 294 and 506 (II) of IPC were framed against the applicants.
The prosecution's case, in short, is that, the FIR was lodged against various accused persons including the applicants but, at the time of filing of charge-sheet, the police left the names of the applicants and therefore, the respondent No.2 had lodged a complaint against them.
The complaint was registered and therefore, the charges were framed by the learned Sessions Court on the basis of that complaint as well as the police case.
After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that some of the accused persons like Raja Bhaiya had assaulted the various victims Ajmer, Gulab and CRR No.2019/2012 Devendra by firing from the guns and therefore, the charges of offence punishable under section 307 of IPC were framed against such type of accused persons.
According to the FIR and statements given by various witnesses under sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C., it is apparent that the applicants have participated in the crime.
They assaulted the various victims and therefore, their common intention is visible from the evidence adduced by the prosecution.
Similarly, more than 5 persons have committed the crime, therefore, offence punishable under section 148 of IPC was also constituted.
Similarly, the trial Court has rightly framed the charges of offence punishable under section 323, 294 and 506 (II) of IPC against the applicants.
At present, it cannot be said that since the police left their names, therefore, they did not participate in the crime.
The testimony of the complainant cannot be brushed aside at present.
Consequently, no illegality or perversity is visible in the impugned order dated 27.7.2012 passed by the learned FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh.
There is no basis by which the present revision can be accepted.
Consequently, the present revision is hereby dismissed at motion stage.
CRR No.2019/2012 A copy of the order be sent to the trial Court for information and to proceed with the trial.
(N.K.GUPTA) JUDGE Pushpendra