ARVIND KUMAR Vs. SESSIONS JUDGE AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Sessions Judge And Another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The revisionist, by means of this revision, seeks to set aside the impugned order dated 30.08.2006, whereby it was directed that the charges under Sections 324 and 504 of IPC be framed against the accused-respondent no. 2. Learned Sessions Judge, vide order dated 30.08.2006, directed that no offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC was, prima facie, made out against the accused. Learned Sessions Judge accordingly, framed the charges against respondent no. 2, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 324 and 504 of IPC on the selfsame date and transferred the file to the Chief Judicial Magistrate for disposal according to law, in as much as, the offences under Sections 324 of 504 of IPC were triable by Magistrate.
(2.) An FIR was lodged by the revisionist against respondent no. 2 on 13.11.2004, in police station Kichha, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 449 of IPC. It was alleged in the FIR that on 13.11.2004, at 05:30 P.M., accused Ram Pravesh abused Smt. Ram Pyari, Gram Pradhan. Thereafter, the accused, with the intention of killing the informant, gave a blow of paatal (sharp edged weapon), as a consequence of which the informant sustained injury in his palm, which started bleeding profusely. The informant saved his life by entering into his house. Accused also followed him. The witnesses namely, Ashok and Ashraf reached on the spot, who caught hold of the accused. After the investigation, a chargesheet under Sections 449, 307 and 504 of IPC was submitted against the accused Ram Pravesh, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. When the trial began and prosecution opened it's case, a plea was raised by the accused that no offence punishable either under Section 449 of IPC or under Section 307 of IPC was made out against him. Both the sides were heard on charge. The Sessions Judge after considering the FIR, Chargesheet and the medical report of the injured thought it proper to frame the charges under Sections 324 and 504 of IPC. Learned Sessions Judge was of the opinion that no offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC was made out (and consequently, there was no question of framing of charge under Section 449 of IPC).
(3.) The informant-injured was examined by the Medical Officer of Primary Health Center, Kichha, District Udham Singh Nagar. It will be relevant to reproduce the injury report given by the Medical Officer on 13.11.2004.
The same is reproduced as under:
"(1) Horizontal incised wound over joint of palm and middle finger just above the crease of finger at palmer aspect, size 2 cm x 0.3 mm x 0.5 mm deep. Margins are clear, ends are clear, bleeding present.
(2) Linear incised like injury superficial over distal end and peeling off of proximal end (peeling off about 0.5 cm at epidermis flap) at hypothenar muscle, total length 5 cm.
(3) 3 incised linear wounds between the right thumb and index finger at margin of palm (a) middle one 5 cm x linear superficial at flap in middle (b) upper one 2 cm X linear superficial (c) lower most towards index finger 1.5 cm x linear superficial at flap towards palm.
All above injuries are produced by sharp weapon. Injuries are simple in nature. Duration of injury is fresh.";
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.