Piyush vs Subhash
2023 Latest Caselaw 19478 MP

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 19478 MP
Judgement Date : 22 November, 2023

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Piyush vs Subhash on 22 November, 2023

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

                              - : 1 :-
                                                   M.Cr.C. No.21747/2022



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      AT INDORE
                       BEFORE
           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA

              ON THE 22nd OF NOVEMBER, 2023

           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 21747 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
PIYUSH S/O SHRI RAJENDRA SUGANDHI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS 50/3, SECOND FLOOR, SATYA VILA,
SUGANDHI CAR GARAGE I.G. OFFICE KE PASS, DEWAS ROAD.
UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                  .....PETITIONER
(THE PETITIONER PRESENT IN PERSON.)

AND
   SUBHASH S/O SATYANARAYAN SUGANDHI, AGED ABOUT 76
1. YEARS, 50/3, SATYA VILLA DEWAS ROAD. UJJAIN (MADHYA
   PRADESH)
   SHAILENDRA S/O SATYANARAYAN SUGANDHI, AGED ABOUT 64
2. YEARS, 50/3, SATYA VILA, DEWAS ROAD, UJJAIN (MADHYA
   PRADESH)
   YOGENDRA S/O SATYANARAYAN SUGANDHI, AGED ABOUT 60
3. YEARS, 50/3, SATYA VILA, DEWAS ROAD, UJJAIN (MADHYA
   PRADESH)
   AMARNATH S/O SUBHASH SUGANDHI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
4.
   50/3, SATYA VILA, DEWAS ROAD, UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
   STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH MADHAVNAGAR
5.
   MADHAVNAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                .....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 4.)
(SHRI SUDHANSHU VYAS, LEARNED GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.5/STATE.)


      This petition coming on for hearing on admission this day, the
                                          - : 2 :-
                                                                     M.Cr.C. No.21747/2022



court passed the following: :
                                     ORDER

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition u/s. 482 of the Cr.P.C. challenging order dated 12.11.2021 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Ujjain in Cr. Case No. 990/2020 whereby the application u/s. 216 of the Cr.P.C. for adding the charge u/s. 307 and 326 of the IPC has been rejected. The Cr. Revision No. 138/2021 preferred against the aforesaid order has been dismissed vide order dated 13.4.2022 passed by the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain as there is no material to interfere with the order of learned CJM.

2. Facts of the case, in short, are as under :

2.1 The petitioner lodged the FIR on 11.2.2020 at Police Station Madhav Nagar, Ujjain u/s. 323, 294, 506, 34 of the IPC against Yogendra Sugandhi, Subhash Sugandhi, Shailendra Sugandhi and Amarnath. The contents of the FIR are as under :

"izFke lwpuk rF; :

Qfj;knh us Fkkuk gkftj vkdj ekSf[kd fjiksVZ fd;k dh eSa lR;foyk nsokljksM+ ij jgrk gqWA mDr Hkou esa esjs ifjokj ds lkFk esjs pkpk 'kSysUnz lqxa/kh] ;ksxsUnz lqxa/kh] o rkÅ lqHkk"k lqxa/kh o izdk'k lqxa/kh dk ifjokj Hkh fuokl djrk gSA fnukad 09@02@2020 dks nksigj 2-30 cts vius ?kj ij uhps [kM+k FkkA rks ,d iqfyl toku esjs pkpk 'kSysUnz lqxa/kh dk irk iqNus yxk rks eSus dgk eq>s ugh irk bl ij esjs pkpk ;ksxsUnz lqxa/kh] 'kqHkk"k] 'kSysUnz] vejukFk ?kj ls ckgj fudy vk;s vksj eq>s xkfy;k nsus yxs vksj cksys dh ?kj ij iqfyl dks cqykrk gS eSus dgk eq>s ugh irk bl ij esjs pkpk ;ksxsUnz lqxa/kh us yksgs dk jkM M.Ms tSlk ?kj ls fudky dj yk;k vksj eq>s flj ij ekjus yxk ftls eSus vkius nkfgus gkFk ij jksd fy;k ftlls eq>s nkfgus gkFk dh dykbZ esa pksV yxhA lHkh us eq>s ekWa&cgu dh vf'yy xkyh;k nh vksj esjs lkFk ekjihV djus yxsA lHkh us eq>s /kedh nh dh gekjs ekeys es cksysxk rks rq>s tku ls [kRe dj nsaxsA eSus iqoZ es 'kSysUnz lqxa/kh o lqHkk"k lqxa/kh ds fo:) firk th dh thouHkj dh dekbZ lEifRr ds lEcU/k esa /kks[k/kM+h dh f'kdk;r dh gSA ftl dkj.k ;g yksx eq>ls o esjs ifjokj ls jaft'k

- : 3 :-

j[krs gSA fjiksVZ djrk gqW dk;Zokgh dh tkosA"

According to the petitioner, his Uncle Yogendra Sugandhi tried to assault him by an iron rod on his head with an intention to kill him. He saved himself by raising his right hand and sustained the fracture. Had he not saved his head, he would have sustained the injury on head and died, therefore, the police ought to have filed the charge-sheet u/s. 307 of the IPC as the ingredients of Section 307 of the IPC are there. The Public Prosecutor also filed an application u/s. 216 of the Cr.P.C. for additional of charge u/s. 307 and 326 of the IPC but the learned CJM has wrongly rejected the application. Learned CJM while rejecting the applicant has held that the rod is not a sharp edged and cutting weapon and only fracture has been caused, therefore, Section 307 and 326 cannot be added. At this stage the learned CJM considered that as per the opinion given by the Doctor in the MLC no life threatening injury was caused. The injury was also not on vital part of the body. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has also given the entire material and found that hollow iron pipe measuring 2 ft. x 5 Inches was used in causing the injury, therefore, charge u/s. 326 and 307 of the IPC is not made out. 3 Even otherwise, during pendency of the trial, the trial Court is competent Court to add or delete the charges on the basis of material available on record. If the prosecution is able to produce any material to establish that the charges u/s. 326 or 307 of IPC are liable to be added, the trial Court may consider at any stage of the trial before judgment. If such an occasion comes before the Court, then the finding recorded by the trial Court, Sessions Court and this Court shall not come in the way.

- : 4 :-

4. With the aforesaid, this petition filed u/s. 482 of the Cr.P.C. stands disposed off.

( VIVEK RUSIA ) JUDGE Alok/-

Date: 2023.11.23 17:07:03 +05'30'