BHALLU @ BALKRISHAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on the question of admission. By this Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C., the applicants have challenged the order dated 30-10-2013 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in S.T. No. 139/2013 whereby the charges of offence punishable under Section 307 or 307/149 of IPC were framed against the applicants along with other charges.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that the applicants assaulted the victims by various weapons. It is alleged against the co-accused Arif that he assaulted the victim Heera Singh by a knife and remaining accused persons assaulted him by sticks.

(3.) After considering the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that by knife one lacerated wound was found on the head of the victim Heera Singh, however, there was no fracture found below the injury. No symptom of brain haemorrhage was found to the victim. No other injury was found fatal or grave in nature. Under such circumstances, it cannot be said that the applicants intended to kill the victim Heera Singh or Heera Singh sustained fatal injury so that knowledge of the applicants could be presumed about that injury. The matter of the victim Heera Singh does not fall within the purview of Section 307 of IPC. Therefore, prima facie no offence under Section 307 of IPC is made out against any of the applicants either directly or with the help of Section 34 of IPC. Under such circumstances, the learned First Additional Sessions Judge has committed an error of law in framing the charge of Section 307 or 307/34 of IPC against the applicants.