MEHBOOB HAJI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed under section 397/401 of Criminal Procedure Code against the order dated 18 -10 -2004 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in S. T. No. 97/02, whereby the order for framing the charge under section 307/34 and 324/34 of Indian Penal Code against the applicants has been passed and the same are framed.

(2.) ACCORDING to prosecution, factual matrix of the case are like that on 3 -11 -2001 at about 2.15 in the noon the complainant Baddu @ Raghuvir Vishwakarma and his friend Annu @ Anil Tiwari were discussing family matter in front of New Road Lines, Sagar at the same time accused Jamil and Jabbar came there and abusing in filthy language and asked them that they were creating lot of bossism and the present applicants had also came to that place out of them Mehboob Haji armed with Chhura, a sharp edge weapon and Sattar armed with iron rod and said like other accused persons and told "Maro salon ko" and with the intention to cause death of the complainant one blow of Chhura was given by Pamma by which the complainant received injury on his thigh and immediately he failed down and one blow of iron rod was given by Sattar and when said Annu @ Anil Tiwari came to rescue the complainant then he was also attacked with the intention to cause death and gave a blow of Chhura on his buttocks by applicant No. 1 Mehboob Hazi and one blow of iron rod was given on the head to Annu by Sattar. The incident was immediately reported to police on which an offence was registered and after investigation charge -sheet submitted against Jamil, Jabbar and Sattar but at the initial stage present applicants were not sent for trial as investigation officer has not found any allegation against them as per police report filed under section 173 of Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned Senior counsel Shri S. C. Dutt assisted by Shri Alok Tapikar for applicant and Shri J. K. Jain, learned Government Advocate for respondent State and on perusing copy of charge -sheet and the impugned order. I am of the considered view that sufficient ingredients for framing charges were available on record and this revision has no merit, deserves to be dismissed.