SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 4341

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL ON THE 18th OF AUGUST, 2022 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1403 of 2022 Between:- 1. RAMRATAN SINGH S/O FERAN SINGH YADAV, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BHAGWAT BHAJAN SHIVAJI NAGAR MOTI JHEEL GWALIOR PERMANENT ADD. VILL . RAMNAGAR SODA PS ANTRI (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. RAMAKHTAYAR SINGH S/O SHRI RAMRATAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR SHIVAJI NAGAR, MOTIJHIL GWALIOR, AT PRESENT VILLAGE RAMNAGAR SODA PS ANTARI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI ARUN KUMAR PATERYA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE STATION P.S. PURANI CHHWANI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI R.K.AWASTHI, LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR STATE)

This revision coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the following:

Advocates:
Arun Kumar Paterya,Advocate General

ORDER

This revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 10.12.2021 passed by 12th Additional Sessions Judge Gwalior, District- Gwalior (M.P.) in S.T. No. 635/2021 by which charges under Section 307/34 of IPC (three counts) have been framed against petitioners.

In brief facts of the case for disposal of this petition are that on

10.06.2021 at 1 am Gopal Singh Yadav lodged a Dehati Nalishi at JAH Trauma Centre Gwalior against petitioners Ramratan Singh and Ramakhtyar Singh and one Naval Yadav in injured state that on 09.06.2021, he was at Kuleth. At 9:15 pm, his son Jeetu telephoned him that at the house situated at Motijheel, Ramratan Singh and Ramakhtyar Singh and one Naval Yadav are quarreling. On his information, when he came to the house, Ramratan Singh and Ramakhtyar Singh and one Naval Yadav within intention to kill him assaulted with Lathi on his head due to which blood started oozing out. Thereafter Ramratan assaulted him with danda due to which he sustained injuries on his legs and waist. When his wife Saraswati and son Jeetu came to intervene. Accused persons also committed marpeet with them due to which his wife Saraswati sustained injuries on her eye-lid and head and his son Jeetu sustained injuries on his head. On his report FIR bearing crime No. 249/2021 for the offence punishable under Section 307/34 of IPC was registered at Police Station Purani Chawni District Gwalior against petitioners and one Naval Yadav. Injured were sent for medical examination. As per MLC report, Jeetu Yadav sustained lacerated wound on fronto parietal bone, left side and right side, x-ray was advised. Complainant Gopal got lacerated wound on skull and left forearm and Saraswati Yadav got lacerated wound on right upper eye-lid and left parietal bone. All the injured persons were advised for x-ray. As per x-ray report, no bone injury was seen. Statement of witnesses were recorded. Accused persons were arrested. From the possession of accused Lathi was seized. After investigation, charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 307/34 of IPC was submitted before committal court. Thereafter case was committed to the Sessions Court. Learned Sessions Judge by passing the order dated 10.12.2021 framed charges against petitioners under Section 307/34 of IPC.

From the side of petitioners is submitted that petitioners had no intention to kill the injured persons. The allegation against them that they were having Lathi in their hand. No grievous injury was found on the body of injured persons. Accused persons have not used any firearm so that their intention could be gathered that they intended to kill the injured persons. Besides this, there is no medical report to this effect that injuries sustained to the injured persons are dangerous to life.

Section 307 of IPC reads thus:- 307. Attempt to murder.—Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to [imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.

In Jai Narain Mishra & ors. Vs. The State of Bihar, AIR 1972 SC

1764, the Supreme Court held thus :

"The evidence shows that he was responsible for the injury on the head which he had given with a Farsa. That injury is described Dr. Mishra as a lacerated wound 2 = " x = scalp deep on the left side of the head on the parietal region. It is also described as a simple injury. It is obvious that though a Farsa had been used the sharp edge of the Farsa may not have been used. But since this injury was caused by an instrument which used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death the offence would be one Under Section 324 IPC. The co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top