For framing charges under Section 307 IPC, intention and knowledge are crucial, and a prima facie case must be established based on the injuries and circumstances surrounding the incident.

ORDER :

Sandeep Shah, J.

1. In the present revision petition, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 18.02.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Nagaur, in Sessions Case No.02/2024 (State vs. Suresh & Anr.), whereby charges were framed against petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 34 1, 323, 325/34 & 307/34 of IPC.

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that based upon a written report submitted by the complainant - Suresh, an FIR came to be lodged against the present petitioners on 12.10.2023 at Police Station Mundwa, District Nagaur, bearing no.184/2023. In the complaint in question, the complainant - Suresh stated that on 11.10.2023 at around 06:30 PM his real brother- Manohar Lal S/o Ramchandra, aged 20 years, and his cousin brother (uncle’s son)- Mahendra S/o Ramuram, aged 24 years, were on their way to search the buffaloes and reached the road from Badi Nadi to Kharda, where Ramchandra S/o Hajari Ram, Ramkishore S/o Ramchandra, Suresh S/o Ramchandra, wife of Ramchandra and 10-15 persons stopped them and started assaulting them by axe, knife, iron rods and lathis. Post assaulting them, Mahendra was dragged by a tractor and was seriously injured due to the head injury and other injuries caused on his body. Furthermore, Manohar Lal also sustained injuries on his head and on other parts of the body caused by knife.

3. It was further stated that Manohar Lal lost consciousness, and thereafter, upon information being given to the police, Manohar Lal was taken to the hospital. Meanwhile, Mahendra ran away and informed about the incident to the complainant. Upon which, the family members reached the hospital, and thereafter, both the injured persons were taken to Mathuradas Mathur Hospital at Jodhpur, as they were referred to a higher centre. The complainant asserted that the accused snatched the mobile phones of Manohar Lal and Mahendra, and also snatched Rs.35,000/- which was carried by Manohar Lal as receipt of amount after sale of gwar by him. Post lodging of FIR, the police conducted the investigation and recorded statements of various persons including the injured witnesses and post recovery, based upon information given by all three petitioners, lathis and Tractor were recovered. Further, based upon the information divulged by the accused, the site was verified where the incident took place. The injury report of the injured and the site plan etc. were prepared. The police, after thorough investigation, filed the charge-sheet against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 323 , 341, 307/34 of IPC. The police, however, held that the case under Sections 147 , 148, 149 and 379 of IPC with regard to snatching of mobile phone or money was not made. Post taking of cognizance and committal of case, the learned trial Court after hearing both the sides, by way of order impugned, framed the charges for the offences as stated (supra). Being aggrieved against the same, the present revision petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a bare perusal of the charge-sheet filed by the police itself will reveal that the incident, in essence, never happened and the complainant has made a mountain out of a mole, wherein false allegations with regard to snatching of money and mobile phone were also levelled, which the police itself has found to be untrue. He further submits that as per the FIR, the allegation levelled was assaulting the injured with axe, knife, iron rods and lathis whereas as per the injury report, no such corresponding injury has been caused and