Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shersingh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 August, 2023
Author: Vishal Dhagat
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
ON THE 2 nd OF AUGUST, 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 130 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. SHERSINGH S/O SHRI PREETAM YADAV, AGED
ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
VILLAGE KESHAVGARH POLICE STATION
MOHANGARH DISTRICT TIKAMGARH (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. RAJU YADAV S/O SHRI TORAN YADAV, AGED
ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST
R/O VILLAGE KESHAVGARH P.S. MOHANGARH
DISTRICT TIKAMGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI S.K. MISHRA - ADVCOATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION MOHANGARH DISTRICT
TIKAMGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. JANMEJAY MISHRA S/O S.P.MISHRA, AGED
ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCCUPATION: TEHSILDAR
TEHSILL MOHANGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI P. THAKRE - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
1. Applicants have filed criminal revision against framing of charge under
Section 307 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that as prosecution story,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ROSHNI SINGH
Signing time: 03-08-2023
16:44:52
applicants had assaulted Tahsildar with a stone. It is submitted that applicants
were armed and when Tahsildar was going to his vehicle, applicants are said to
have thrown a stone which hit him on head. There was only minor abrasion on
his head. Applicants do not have any intention to murder Tahsildar. Act of
applicants also does not suggest that applicants have any intention to cause
murder of Tahsildar. In these circumstances, charges framed against applicants
by order dated 22.11.2023 and charges dated 23.11.2022 be quashed.
3. Government Advocate appearing for the State has opposed the prayer.
It is submitted that for quashing an FIR, ingredients of FIR is to be seen and
from the FIR, intention of the applicants is to be gathered. Other supervening
circumstances cannot be taken into consideration. As per FIR, it has been
stated that applicants with an intention to kill Tahsildar has assaulted him with a
stone which hit on his head. It is submitted that injury may not be dangerous to
life but intention of the persons who were doing assault is to be seen. In FIR, it
has been stated that assault has been made with intention to kill Tahsildar.
Therefore, truthfulness of FIR cannot be examined at this stage. It is matter of
evidence whether there is truthfulness in allegations made in FIR or not? FIR is
to be prima facie seen on basis of ingredients available in it and if on basis of
said FIR, no case is made out then charges can be quashed. In these
circumstances, revision be dismissed.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. As per judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of State Of
Haryana And Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal And Ors, reported in 1992 AIR 604,
prima facie, it has been stated in FIR that applicants had assaulted the
Tahsildar with intention to kill. Tahsildar has also received injury on his head. At
this stage, truthfulness of facts stated in FIR is not to be considered.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ROSHNI SINGH
Signing time: 03-08-2023
16:44:52
Truthfulness of facts of charges is matter of trial. In these circumstances,
revision is dismissed.
6. Applicants are at liberty to raise all the grounds available to them in
defence before the trial Court.
(VISHAL DHAGAT)
JUDGE
R
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ROSHNI SINGH
Signing time: 03-08-2023
16:44:52
