Mehtab S.Gill, J. - (1.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the charges framed against the petitioners are illegal and without any basis. During the course of investigation, the opinion of the doctor regarding injury No.1 on the head of injured Rajesh was declared to be grievous. This injury was manipulated in connivance with the doctor. Offence under Section 326 IPC was added on 10.5.2001. It is in fact a cross case, where the investigating agency did not take the version put forward by the petitioners. Petitioners received injuries and a case under Sections 323 and 325 read with Section 34 IPC was registered against the respondents. On the side of the petitioners, Chamela Ram petitioner No.1 received a lacerated injury on the right parietal region of scalp, Om Parkash received three injuries and Angrejo Devi received two injuries. The injuries on the persons of the respondents were all allegedly by a blunt weapon.
(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order.
(3.) It is not a case of only receiving injuries by both the parties but the charges framed against the petitioners that they were members of an unlawful assembly and were armed with deadly weapons, like gandasi and Bhalla and with a common object caused injuries to complainant Raghbir Singh and Raj Kali. Raj Kali at that time, was pregnant. Doctor has given his opinion regarding the 326 IPC injury, which at the time of trial, shall be scrutinized.;