DAYANAND JAT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this revision, the accused petitioners have approached this Court for challenging the order dated 17.5.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Churu in Sessions Case No. 10/2015 whereby, the learned trial court directed framing of charges against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 148, 341, 323/149, 325/149 and 307/149 I.P.C.

(2.) A grievance has been raised in this revision to the impugned order to the extent, charge was framed against the accused petitioners for the offence under Section 307 and in the alternative, Section 307/149 I.P.C. The prosecution has set up a case that the incident at hand is a fall out of an earlier F.I.R. of assault lodged against the accused petitioner Dayanand. It is alleged that the injured of this case i.e. Bishna Ram had given evidence in the earlier case and resultantly, Dayanand was arrested and was sent to Police custody. Later, he was released on bail. He started bearing a grudge against Bishna Ram. On 3.1.2015 in the evening, whilst Bishna Ram had gone to Mani Ram's shop for purchasing Bidis and was returning back, the accused party surrounded him in front of the house of Surja Ram. They exhorted that enemy who had given evidence should be killed. Saying this, the accused persons who were armed with lathis, surrounded Bishna Ram and assaulted him indiscriminately. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Inderchand at the P.S. Bhaleri for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148, 149 and 307 I.P.C. Bishna Ram's injuries were examined at the PBM Hospital, Bikaner on 6.1.2015. He was found having a plaster of pairs slab on his left arm. He was complaining of pain and tenderness on the left leg, the chest area and the right forearm. Upon x-ray being conducted, the injured was found suffering from fracture of humerus bone. No other bony injury was noticed on any part of his body. Consequently, the injury No. 1 of the injury report was opined to be grievous in nature. The Investigating Officer proceeded to file the charge-sheet against the accused persons for the offences mentioned above. The trial court framed charges against them in the same terms by the impugned order which is challenged in this revision.

(3.) I have heard and appreciated the arguments advanced by the learned counsel representing the parties and have gone through the impugned order as well as the Challan papers.