The main legal point established in the judgment is that the injuries must indicate an intention to cause fatal injuries to justify framing charges under Section 307 of IPC.

JUDGMENT

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - Petitioner has preferred the present revision petition claiming the following relief:-

"It is most humbly and respectfully prayed that Your lordship may kindly be pleased to accept and allow this revision petition of the petitioner and order dated 11.05.2022 passed by the Sessions Judge, Merta in Sessions Case No. 7/2022 may kindly be quashed and set aside qua the section 307 & 452 of IPC and Hon'ble court remand the matter before the Trial Court for hearing the matter and order afresh speaking order in this case."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 307 of IPC is not made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner and complainant are in first degree of relationship and were having a revenue dispute.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards the conclusion arrived at by the investigating officer, which is part of the charge-sheet.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by this Court in Magha Ram Meghwal & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2017(3) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1352. The said judgment reads as under:-

"By way of this revision preferred under Section 397 Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek to assail the order dated 22.8.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Nagaur whereby, the trial Court framed charges against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 323/34, 325/34, 308, 308/34 I.P.C. Learned counsel Shri Jakhaniya restricted his arguments to the extent of the charge under Section 308 I.P.C. He urges that the sole injured Sohan Ram suffered 7 superficial and trivial injuries on his person in the incident at hour. Of the 7 injuries, one on the right leg was opined to be grievous as there was a fracture of right lower 1/3 part of fibula bone. Out of the 7 injuries, there was abrasion measuring 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm on occipital region of the injured. He thus, urges that the trial court was not at all justified in framing charge against the petitioners for the offence under Section 308 I.P.C. because neither knowledge nor intention to cause such injury which could prove fatal can be attributed to the petitioners in view of the nature and location of the injuries inflicted to the injured. He thus craves for acceptance of the revision and urges that the impugned order deserves to be set aside to the extent of the charge under Section 308 I.P.C.

Per contra, learned counsel Shri Solanki representing the complainant and learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioners' counsel. They urged that as the petitioners inflicted numerous injuries including a head injury to the injured, the trial court rightly framed charge under Section 308 I.P.C. against them.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel representing the parties and have gone through the material available on record.

The injured Sohan Ram suffered the following injures in the incident as per the injury report dated 15.6.2015:-

(1) Reddish diffuse swelling and tenderness is present over lower 1/3 part of rt leg. OR/Xray/blunt

(2) Abrasion 0.5 x 0.5 cm red blood on left occipital region simple/blunt

(3) Laceration 3x0.5 cm red blood on lower 1/3 left thigh simple/blunt

(4) Laceration 2x0.5 cm red blood upper 1/3 rt leg simple/blunt

(5) Laceration 3x0.5 cm red blood middle 1/3 rt leg simple/blunt

(6) Abrasion 2x0.5 cm red blood upper 1/3 left leg mediog simple/blunt

(7) Abrasion 2x0.5 cm red blood on lower 1/3 left leg simple/blunt

After examination of MLX X Ray plates No. 8924/15/6115 there are fracture of Rt Lower 1/3 part of fibula bones. So injury No. 1 is grievous in nature."

On going through the description of the injuries, it is apparent that the sole injury on the head of the injured was 0.5 x 0.5 cm and was not having any depth whatsoever. Thus, apparently, the injury was trivial and superficial. The other in