Rambharose vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

The applicants have challenged the order dated 8.9.2016 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ashoknagar in Sessions Trial No. 146/2015, whereby the charges under Sections 294, 326, 326/34, 325, 325/34, 324/34, 323, 323/34 and 506 (Part-2) of Indian Penal Code, were framed against the applicants.

The facts leading to filing of the instant revision application are that a confrontation took place between the present applicants and respondent No.2. In this free fight both the parties sustained injuries and both the parties reported the matter to the police, which led to registration of FIR at the instance of respondent No.2- Gurmeet Singh against the applicants for commission of the offence triable by JMFC, accordingly, JMFC Ashoknagar framed charges under Sections 294, 324 and 506 (Part-2) of IPC against the applicants. Subsequently, a cross-case was filed by the police against respondent No.2-Gurmeet Singh, which contained offences triable by Court of Session, therefore, the trial was committed to the Court of Session. Due to this fact, the JMFC Ashoknagar, in exercise of power available under Section 323 of CrPC, committed the instant case against the applicants to the Court of Session. The Court of Session on perusal of the material on record found charges against the applicants for commission of offences under Section 326 read with section 34 and, in alternative, Section 325 read with Section 34 of IPC, and accordingly framed the charges.

The applicants are aggrieved by the order by which the charges have been framed against the applicants under Section 326 of IPC, on the ground that the nature of injuries caused to respondent No.2 and other persons are simple in nature and there is no material to attract the prosecution under Section 326 of IPC. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicants taken me to the MLC conducted by the doctor in respect of respondent No.2- Gurmeet Singh, and prayed that the order framing charge for commission of the offences under Section 326 of IPC be set aside.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State supported the impugned order and submitted that since the injuries have been inflicted on the head of respondent No.2, therefore, the charges were rightly framed under Section 326 IPC.

I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused the documents available on record.

Respondent No.2-Gurmeet Singh was examined by the doctor and as per MLC report, the following injuries were found on the person of Gurmeet Singh:- (i) An incised wound 3.5x1 cm. over right side of scalp on parietal region.

(ii) A lacerated wound 2x1 cm. over scalp on occidental region.

(iii)A contusion 5x3 cm. over left forearm.

(iv)A contusion 6x2 cm. over right forearm.

As per MLC report, all the injuries as described were referred for x-ray but as per x-ray report, injury No.3 was said to be grievous in nature due to the fracture of mid sheft of left radius & ulna bone which is caused by hard and blunt object.

A perusal of the MLC report shows that though the injuries have been shown to be on the head but as per doctor the said injuries have been opined by the doctor to be simple in nature. Therefore, framing of charge under Section 326 of IPC, in my opinion, is improper and the trial should proceed for the offences punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 of IPC against the applicants and likewise under Sections, 294, 323, 324 read with Section 34 and 506 (Part-II) of IPC.

Taking this view of the matter, the instant revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside to the extent it frames charge under Section 326 and 326 read with Section 34 of IPC. The trial Court is directed to frame charge against applicant No.1-Gurmel Singh for commission of the offence under Sections 294, 325, 324, 323 read with Section 34 and 506 (Part-2) of IPC and against remaining applicants under Sections 294, 325/34, 324/34, 323, 323/34 and 506 (Part-II) of IPC. It is needless to state that the trial Court shall proceed with the trial without being influenced by the observations made herein above.