Ramesh Prasad and Another vs State of M.P.

B.D. Rathi, J.—With the consent of both the parties, matter is finally heard. By invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court, petitioners have preferred this petition u/s 397 read with Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ''the Code'') seeking discharge of petitioners for the offence u/s 308 of IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that by the impugned order dated 09-10-2013 passed by learned trial Court, the charge u/s 308 of IPC has been framed against the petitioners apart from other charges. If the entire case of prosecution is taken in its totality even then looking to the medical report, no case is made out against the petitioners for the offence punishable u/s 308 of IPC.

Prayer of discharge from the offence u/s 308 of IPC made by learned counsel for the petitioners, is opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and submitted that there is sufficient ingredients for framing the charge u/s 308 of IPC against the petitioners. She has further submitted that meticulous examination of evidence cannot be done by this Court at the revisional stage.

The incident has occurred on 03-01-2013 in the noon and on the same day FIR was lodged at Police Station Murwas District Vidisha. As per accusation of prosecution, injured Bhagwan Singh, Golo Bai and Pooran Singh all were beaten by the petitioners. The quarrel took place on boundary dispute of agriculture land. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in the matter for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 294, 308 and 506B read with Section 34 of IPC.

It be noted that for the purpose of framing of charge u/s 308 of IPC, it must be proved that:

i-The accused committed an act.

ii-The said act was committed with the intention or knowledge to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

iii-The act was committed under such circumstances if the accused by that act had caused death would have been guilty of culpable homicide.

It is settled law that the Court is to see whether the act in question, irrespective of its result, was done with the intention or knowledge and under circumstances mentioned in section 308, it is sufficient to justify a conviction u/s 308 if there is present an intent coupled with some overt act in execution thereof. It is not essential that bodily injury capable of causing death should have been inflicted. Although the nature of injury actually caused may often give considerable assistance in coming to a finding as to the intention of the accused, such intention may also be deduced from other circumstances, and may even, in some cases, be ascertained without any reference at all to actual wounds.

The charge u/s 308 of IPC was framed on account of injury caused to the injured Bhagwan Singh and Golo Bai. On perusal of MLC report of Bhagwan Singh, it seems that one incised wound was vertically found present over the right side of forehead having size of 1/2'' x1/4'' x 1/4'' and that was simple in nature as opined by the doctor. Similarly two incised wounds were caused; one at the right forearm and second at right side of forehead to Golo Bai and both were also simple in nature as opined by the doctor.

From perusal of FIR and the statements of witnesses recorded in the Court, it seems that even after availability of opportunity petitioners have not caused any other injury with intention to commit murder.

On appreciation of aforesaid proposition of facts and law, taking into account the medical report of the injured and further taking the matter in its totality, the ingredients for framing the charge for the offence u/s 308 of IPC against the petitioners are missing, therefore, petition is allowed. Order impugned passed by learned trial Court is set aside to the extent of framing of charge u/s 308 of IPC against the petitioners. Petitioners are discharged of the offence u/s 308 of IPC.

Trial Court has already framed the charge u/s 324/34 of IPC against the petitioners in relation to the injuries discussed above so there is no need to frame other alternative charge in place of Section 308 of IPC for the abovementioned injuries.

Trial Court is directed to proceed further in trial against the petitioners for remaining charges. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court.