MOHD. YAQUB KHAN Vs. DINNU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is filed by the complainant, aggrieved by the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur dated 31.3.1992 in Cr. Rev. No. 10/1990, whereby he allowed the revision filed by the accused and directed that charge under section -307 IPC need not be framed against the accused.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on 25.5.1988 at about 11.00 P.M., the accused persons, armed with deadly weapons, proceeded to the house of the complainant, threatening to kill him and to bum his house; that when non -applicant No.3 tried to aim the stone weighing 2 kgs on the head of the complainant, he tried to escape and the stone having fallen on the shoulder of the complainant caused fracture to the left collar -bone and as such there is, prima facie, material to try the accused for the offences u/s 307 r/w Sec.149 I.P.C. He, therefore, submitted that the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge deleting the charge u/s. 307 IPC is illegal and is liable to be set -aside. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in AIR 1983 SC 305 (State of Maharashtra v. Balram Barna Patil) and AIR 1986 SC 683 (Jaspal Singh v. State of Punjab). The learned counsel for the non -applicant/accused on the other hand relied upon Ex. P/1, which is the First Information Report given by the complainant in which it is narrated that when the complainant was sleeping, Vinod Lodhi, younger son of Mullaji and their companions came to his house and Vinod was aimlessly pelting stones at the house of the complainant and that after he woke up, he fired the gun in the air in order to scatter the culprits. The First Information Report is silent about the weight of the stone nor does it specify that the stone was aimed at the head of the complainant. There is improvement in the complaint filed by the applicant herein six months later and that is why, taking into consideration the facts narrated in the earliest report, the learned Additional Sessions Judge felt that there is no enough material to subject the non -applicants for a sessions trial for the offence u/s. 307 r/w. sec. 199I.P.C. The decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant are distinguishable, inasmuch as, those cases relate to mob rioting wherein there were deaths of more than one person and injuries caused to some others.