VIKRAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against order dated 17.06.2019, passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Itarsi District Hoshangabad in S.T. No.48/2019, whereby charges of the offences punishable under Sections 307 read with 34, 294 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against the applicants.

(2.) The case of prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 06.04.2019 at about 10:30 p.m. when harvesting of crop was going on in the agricultural field, the applicants being armed with lathi, danda, iron rod and axe came there and started assaulting the complainant Indraraj Singh and his uncle Omkar Singh with the intention of causing death, by which, they suffered injuries and in the course of which, the applicants also caused destruction to the vehicles. Accordingly, at the instance of complainant Indraraj Singh, an FIR has been registered at Police Station Pathrota District Hoshangabad as Crime No.101/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 427 and 34 of IPC. During investigation, statements of injured persons and the witnesses who had seen the incident have been recorded and the injured were sent for medical treatment. On completion of investigation, challan has been filed and thereafter, vide impugned order, charges have been framed against the present applicants for commission of aforesaid offences. They abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated despite that fact that it was the complainant party that was the aggressor. For this, attention has been invited to the fact that a counter case was registered by applicant No.1 Vikram against the complainant party as Crime No.102/2019 for the offence under Sections 294, 326, 324, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC at the same police station and applicant No.4 Chandrashekhar sustained multiple incised wounds in his left hand. According to him, the dispute between the parties is in respect of agricultural land on which a civil suit was registered by father of applicant No.4 as Civil Suit No.57- A/2015 wherein prohibitory order was passed against Omkar Singh and despite the order of the Civil Court, Omkar Singh entered in the filed of applicant No.4 Chandrashekhar and in the aforesaid quarrel, both the parties received injuries. It is also contended that the complainant has attempted to cloak it with a criminal flavour to harass the applicants. He has further submitted that as per the prosecution story and the material placed on record, no offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC is made out in view of the fact that there was no intention or knowledge on the part of applicants to cause death of complainant Indraraj Singh and his uncle Omkar Singh as they have not sustained fatal injury which is sufficient to cause death and at the most, the offence under Section 323 IPC is attracted. He would lastly submit that looking to the material placed on record, the applicants could not be held liable for the offences charged with and they are entitled to be discharged.