DEVI LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant and carefully gone through the impugned order.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that all other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail and in this case cross FIR has also been filed by the accused-party. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicant Jiya Lal received as many as five injuries including injury upon his head and another accused Tulsa Ram received three injuries but knowingly that there is injury upon the head of Jiya Lal, the Police has registered the case under Sections 323, 341 and 34 I.P.C. against the complainant party in which the investigation is going on. In the present case, injured Gopi Ram has received two injuries out of which one is upon head and injured Kanshi Ram also received one injury upon head. The injury received by injured Kanshiram was simple in nature but injury received by Gopi Ram was grievous in nature. At present, injured Gopi Ram is physically fit though the case was registered against the applicants under Sections 341, 323 and 143 but after medical report, the police has added Section 307 I.P.C. and investigation is going on in both the cases.

(3.) Further, it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complainant party has also received serious injury upon the head. It is also contended that there was no intention to inflict any injury upon the person of injured Gopi Ram but as per the allegation levelled in the FIR only one injury was caused by the applicant Devi Lal. Therefore, no intention can be gathered for committing any offence under Section 307 I.P.C. Likewise, other accusedapplicant Jiyalal himself received injury upon head but prosecution is not considering that the case falls under Section 307 I.P.C.