ISHWAR LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision-petition is directed against the order dated August 17,1988, passed by the Sessions Judge, Sirohi, by which the learned Sessions Judge refused to frame charge Under Section 337, I.P.C. against the accused- respondents and sent the case back under Section 228 Cr. P.C. to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi.

(2.) On November 15,1985, at about 7.00 p.m. a First Information Report was registered at the Police Station, Sirohi, on the statement of Ishwar Lal, recorded by Jogsingh, Assistant Sub- Inspector of Police, in the Government Hospital, Sirohi, wherein it was stated that on that very day, at about 7.00 p.m., when his brother Kailash was repairing the tube-light, at that lime Revad Ram S/o Shri Kishan came in front of their door and asked Kailash what was the matter and thereafter some altercation took-place and accused hurled abuses and went away. After sometime, he alongwith Kishan, Poonam, Om Prakash, Laxman, Magan S/o Revad, Smt. Guggi W/o Revad, and the wives of Prem, Kishan, Laxman and Om prakash came there armed with deadly weapons. They took-out Kailash out-side the pole and started beating him with lathies. The informant was in the pole and he tried to rescue Kailash. The accused, also gave beatings to the complainant. The complainant and Kailash raised alarm, upon which Prabhu Dayal, Basant, Hajari, Bhuri and Ratan came there and rescued them. These persons, who came there to rescue Kailash and Ishwar, also, received injuries. On the basis of this report, a case was registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 452, I.P.C. and the police, after necessary investigation, persented the challan against the accused persons under Sections 307, 452, 325, 323,147,148 and 149, I.P.C. The learned Magistrate committed the accused to stand trial in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Sirohi, as the challan was preferred against the accused under Section 307, I.P.C., also. The learned Sessions Judge, by his order dated August 17, 1988, came to the conclusion that the ingredients of the charge under Section 307, I.P.C were not made-out and he, therefore, sent the case back to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirohi, for trial. It is against this order that the present revision-petition has been filed by the petitioner-complainant.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned Counsel for the accused-respondents.