The central legal point established in the judgment is that the intention to cause severe harm necessary for an attempt to murder under Section 307 of I.P.C. must be evident from the nature of the injuries and the medical evidence.

JUDGMENT

B.D. Rathi, J.

1. This revision petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1974 preferred by the petitioners-accused is directed against an order dated 26/9/2012 passed in S.T. No. 3/2012 by the Additional Sessions Judge Ganjbasoda, district Vidisha, framing charge against accused/petitioners for commission of offence punishable under Section 307/149 of I.P.C.

2. The facts, in short, just for the decision of this revision are that on 7/11/2011 at around 11 o'clock, in the noon, in village Karonda at the field of Khurd Teliwala the accused-petitioners after having armed with deadly weapons like farsa, luhangi, axe rushed to the field and restrained the complainant Rajesh from ploughing and on being objected the complainant Rajesh and his father Bhawani Singh Raghuvanshi were caused grievous injuries by the accused-petitioners with their respective weapons. On report, Crime No. 227/11 was registered against the petitioners for commission of offence punishable under sections 294, 324, 451, 506/34 of I.P.C. On committal, the session trial was commenced and charges, as mentioned above, have been framed against the petitioners/accused by the learned trial Judge, hence this revision.

3. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that on perusal of the FIR and the medical reports of the injured, no case for framing of charge under Section 307 of I.P.C. against the petitioners is made out. It is submitted that the injured have sustained simple injuries and no such grievous injuries have been caused by the accused-petitioners which were in either way dangerous to their lives. Apart the aforesaid, it is also pointed out that earlier charge-sheet were filed against the same petitioners for offence under sections 326, 324, 452, 294 and 506/34 of I.P.C. and the learned trial court also framed the charges for the alleged offence vide order dated 26/6/12 but subsequently on the basis of supplementary charge-sheet, offence under section 307/149 of I.P.C. was aided and accordingly charge has been framed, which is against the settled principles of law. Hence, it is prayed that by allowing the revision, the accused-petitioners be discharged of the alleged offence under Section 307/149 of I.P.C.

4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State opposed the aforesaid prayer and supported the impugned order of framing of charge by the trial court. It is therefore prayed that the revision petition of the petitioners be dismissed.

5. Now, this court has to examine the legality, propriety and correctness of the order challenged in the revision.

6. As regards the argument advanced on the point that the investigating agency is refrained from making further investigation and submitting supplementary challan/additional report, this argument is without any substance.

7. Sub-section (8) of section 173 of Cr.P.C. is based on the necessity to confer express power on the police to make further investigation and submit supplemental reports. Thus, whenever fresh facts occur to the police resulting in further investigation, it is the duty of the police to send a supplemental report based on such material to the Magistrate. The power of the Investigating Agency to investigate and submit further report is well recognized by this provision. For re-investigation no further permission/sanction is required from the court. Reference in this respect is made to a Division decision of this court rendered in the case of Prashant Pathak & Another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2010(2) MPHT 57.

8. Now, the next question for consideration is whether the learned trial Judge was justified in framing the charge for the offence under Section 307/149 of I.P.C. against the petitioners-accused?

9. In order to appreciate the arguments advanced by the parties, it would be useful to reproduce section 307 of I.P.C. It reads as under:-

"307. Attempt to murder.-Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such