Nisha Gupta, J. - (1.) With the consent of learned counsel for parties the matter has been heard finally at admission stage.
(2.) The aforesaid revision petition has been filed by petitioner against the order dated 25.5.2006, whereby learned Judge has framed charge against the petitioners for offence under Sections 148, 307/149, 325/149 and 323 I.P.C.
(3.) The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there was no injury on the person of injured by any sharp edged weapon or dangerous to life. Hence no charge could be framed against the petitioners under Section 307/149 I.P.C. Learned trial Court has not applied its mind on the material available on record, hence the impugned order should be quashed. He placed reliance on Yogesh @ Sachin Jagdish Joshi v. State of Maharashtra, JT 2008 (6) SC 299 , wherein it was held that while framing the charge, under Section 227 of the Code, the Court must consider entire material available on record to form an opinion that evidence, if un-rebutted, would lead to a judgment of conviction. Learned counsel also placed reliance on Mohan Lal Rao v. State of Rajasthan, 2008 (3) RCC 1102 , and Sarabjit Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 2009 SC 2792 .;