SHAMMI KOHLI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed against the order dated 9. 4. 2008 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge/ F. T. C. No. 1, Agra, in S. T. No. 450 of 2007, State Vs. Shammi Kohli and others, whereby the Court proceeded to frame charges u/s 364, 307 I. P. C. against the revisionists. It appears from the record that an F. I. R. was lodged at Police Station New Agra, District Agra, on 18. 9. 2006 at 11. 10 P. M. by O. P. No. 2, Sharad Yadav. It was alleged in the FIR that on 18. 9. 2006 his brother Gaurav Yadav and Gautam Singh were going on a motorcycle, which was dashed by a motorcycle and an Indica car from behind. Both fell down. Thereafter the accused Shammi Kohli, Ravi Sharma, Monu alias Lalit and Pappu Zed alias Umesh started beating them. Both tried to run at which Shammi Kohli said to Pappu Zed to kill Gaurav at which Pappu Zed fired 3-4 rounds upon Gaurav but anyhow he escaped. Thereafter Gaurav was forcibly brought into the Indica car and was taken towards Kamla Nagar but anyhow he was saved. On this FIR a case was registered u/s 364, 307 I. P. C. Later on the charge sheet was submitted u/s 147, 148, 149, 349, 342, 504, 506 I. P. C. However, the Magistrate committed the case u/s 307, 364 I. P. C. When the case came at the stage of charge the trial judge also proceeded to frame the charges u/s 364 and 307 I. P. C. I have heard Mr. H. P. Dubey, learned counsel for the revisionists, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. It has been argued by Mr. Dubey that from the evidence on the record no offence u/s 364 or 307 I. P. C. was made out and therefore, the trial court should not have framed such charges. I do not agree with this argument. A bare reading of the statements of the complainant as well as of the victim would reveal that the victim was abducted in order that he may be murdered or may be so disposed of as to be put in danger of being murdered. In such view of the matter, a charge u/s 364 I. P. C. was prima-facie made out. It is also evident from the statements of these witnesses that the victim was shot at in order to kill him in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly formed by the accused persons and thus, a charge u/s 307 I. P. C. was also prima-facie made out from the record, therefore, the trial court was justified in framing the charges under the aforesaid sections. There is no impropriety in the oder passed by the trial court. The revision is accordingly dismissed. .