Courts possess the statutory power to alter or add to a charge at any time before judgment, provided such amendment does not prejudice the accused. This is not a review of a previous order but a mandatory adaptation of proceedings based on emerging evidentiary findings during trial.

(1) This is a an appeal, filed by the original accused, who has been convicted of offences, punishable under Section 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the nine months' rigorous imprisonment and there months' rigorous imprisonment for the said offences respectively. He is also sentenced a pay of fine of Rs. 300 in addition to sentence of imprisonment for the offence under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, to suffer one month's further rigorous imprisonment. Out of the fine, if recovered, Rs. 150 are ordered to be paid to Shankerlal Chhabildas by way of compensation for the injuries caused to him. This order has been passed by the learned City Magistrate, 9th Court, Shri N. R. Tatia in a Criminal Case No. 464 of 1965.

(2) The prosecution story is briefly stated as under:--

The injured Shankerlal Chhablidas Barot and the appellant Jayantilal Vrajlal Barot are in two opposite factions of their community. The injured Shankerlal is a leader of one faction. On 23rd February, 1965, at about 7.10 hours, he was going to a temple near Usha Talkies in Gomtipur area. That temple is at a distance of about two furlongs form his house, situated in Limbati Pole. When he came near the Employees' State Insurance Scheme Hospital, which is near-by that temple, he was given two or there blows by this appellant with a stick from behind. On receipt of those blows, he locked behind and saw the appellant with a stick. The appellant, thereafter also, gave him some more blows with that sick. He received the blows on his hand and above the waist. In trying to avert the blows, he also received injuries on his fingers. On hearing the shouts, the witnesses, Ramachandra Chhabildas his brother, Babuhai Ochhaval; Ghanshyambhai Laxmishanker and Kishore Chhotubhai came up. They saw the part of the assault. The appellant on seeing those people, having come to rescue the injured, ran away on cycle on which he had come. Ramachandra took the injured Shankerlal at Rajpur Police Chowky. Ramachandra's complaint was recorded there. The injured was sent to the Civil Hospital in Ambulance car and he was treated there. On receipt of a certificate from the Civil Hospital, that injury No. 6 was a fracture of the 8th, 9th and 10th ribs, investigation was made by the Police. Statements were recorded and after the completion of the investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted to the Court for the offences, punishable under Sections 323 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3) After looking into the police-papers, the learned Magistrate first framed a charge against the appellant for an offence, punishable under Section 323 only. An application was given on behalf of the State by the Police Prosecutor that a charge under Section 325 should be framed, as one of the injuries caused to Shankerlal was a grievous hurt. The doctor was, thereupon examined and after the examination of the doctor, the charge was amended and the charge under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the appellant. The appellant was given an opportunity to recall the doctor, after the altered charge was explained to him and doctor was recalled and was further cross examined by the appellant.

(4) The defence version was that he had not committed the offence. He had not gone to the place of offence and had not assaulted Shankerlal. Due to factions in the community, he has been falsely involved. The learned Magistrate believed the prosecution evidence and disbelieved the defence version and convicted