J U D G M E N T

SANJAY KAROL, J.

1. Assailed before us, at the insistence of the complainant, is a judgment and order dated 23rd November, 2023 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Principal Bench at Jabalpur), passed in Criminal Revision No.3125 of 2021, whereby the judgment/order dated 11th November, 2021 in Sessions Trial No.52/2019 of the Signature Not Verified learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Seoni, acquitting the accused-

Digitaly signed by VARSHA MENDIRATTA Date: 2024.09.25 Reason:

Respondents (Nos.2 to 9) of the charges under Sections 294, 323, 506, 353, 352 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code1 was confirmed.

BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

2. The complainant-appellant was appointed as the Chairman of the District Waqf Board, Seoni, thereby being charged with the supervision of Masjid Committees. As a result of the dispute between the newly appointed committee of which he was the Chairman and the previous committee, the claimant was abused and beaten to the point of unconsciousness.

3. He was taken to the district hospital wherefrom he was referred to the Asian Hospital, Nagpur and upon discharge therefrom, FIR No.133 of 2018 dated 9th March, 2018 under Sections 294, 323, 506 read with 34 IPC came to be lodged. 4. Vide order dated 18th March, 2019 of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Seoni, the case was committed to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Seoni. In this order, it was noted that the accused were on bail, but they were taken into custody under Section 307 IPC on that date itself.

5. The Additional Sessions Judge, Seoni, framed charges under Sections 294, 332/34 and 307/34 IPC. Such framing of charge by order dated 17th September, 2019 was challenged before the High Court in Criminal Revision No.4805 of For short, ‘IPC’

2019, whereby vide order dated 21st January, 2020 the same was set aside on the ground that the documents made part of the record were not supplied to the accused. The matter was remanded for framing of charge afresh.

6. It is in this backdrop, that the order impugned before the High Court came to be passed. Regarding Section 307, the order records:-

“In this way in the said medical report, based on the circumstances arising as a result of future aspects, keeping in view, the possibilities, it has been mentioned that if pressure was applied on the scratch marks present in the mouth, nose and throat it could have caused obstruction of the respiratory tract. The said possibility is dependent on that if the accused had committed further acts of the above type, there was a possibility that the windpipe could have been blocked. It has not been said in the report that the injury caused by the accused or the act done by them was likely to result in the death of the complainant. In the above situation, prima facie there is no basis for offence under Section 307 IPC against the accused.”

In respect of the other allegations and alleged crimes, it was observed :-

“As far as the allegations of other crimes against the accused are concerned, the First Information Report has been filed by the complainant to the effect that he was the Chairman of the Waqf Committee in District Seoni, then during his official duty he went to the Mosque to settle the dispute. There, the accused abused and beat him and pressed his mouth, nose and neck. In the above situation, prima facie there are grounds for crime under Sections 294 and 334 read with

34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the accused……”

7. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant-appellant preferred the instant criminal revision. The impugned order records that the medical officer of the District Hospital, Seoni, gave his opinion about the nature of the injury sustained by the complainant, also observing that the throttling could have resulted in respiratory arrest. There are observations with respect to bruises and abrasions, however, details as to their size and location were missing. Such assessment was termed as general and s