Patna High Court
Devgan Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 7 August, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No 486 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-225 Year-2020 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Devgan Kumar Son Of Bilat Chaudhari @ Bilat Sahni Village- Kajichowk
Dharmpur, Samstipur, P.S.- Mufassil, Distt.- Samastipur
2. Arjun Kumar Son Of Bilat Chaudhari @ Bilat Sahni Village- Kajichowk
Dharmpur, Samstipur, P.S.- Mufassil, Distt.- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Prity Mridha W/O- Md. Parwej Alam R/O- New Colony Dharampur, Ward
No. 3, Samastipur, P.S.- Nagar Samastipur, Distt.- Samastipur (informant)
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr Md Shakir Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 07-08-2024
Heard both the counsel.
2 This revision petition has been preferred by the
petitioners being aggrieved with the order dated 29.01.2024 passed
in ST No 713 of 2022 by Additional Sessions Judge IX,
Samastipur whereby the application filed by the petitioners under
Section 228 of the Cr P C has been rejected.
3 On the basis of information given by the informant,
FIR was registered and after completion of investigation, charge
sheet has been filed before the concerned Magistrate for the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.486 of 2024 dt.07-08-2024
offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307/34
of the IPC. After taking cognizance of the offence, the mater was
committed to the Court of Session. During course of the said trial,
at the stage of framing the charge, an application under Section
228 of the Cr P C has been filed by the accused persons which has
been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his
impugned order.
4 It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners
that on the basis of materials available on record, no case under
Section 307 of the IPC is made out against the petitioners. The
injury report of the victim also shows that though he sustained
injuries on his neck but injuries were simple in nature. Therefore,
no offence under Section 307 of the IPC is made out but the
learned trial Court, without considering this fact, rejected the
application of the petitioners.
5 Perusal of the impugned order and other materials
available on record clearly show that it was found by the learned
trial Court that there were sufficient materials available on record
such as statements of witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr P C as
well as injury report of the victim, that the charge under Section
307/34 of IPC is made out. Injury report further shows that the
injuries sustained by the injured were found on his neck and were
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.486 of 2024 dt.07-08-2024
cut injuries and incised wounds. Though they are simple in nature
but were found on the neck of the victim which is vital part and
were caused by sharp edged weapon. Therefore, the learned trial
Court rightly arrived at the conclusion that there is sufficient
material available on record for framing charge under Sections
307/34 of the IPC.
6 I do not find any infirmity/illegality in the order of the
learned Additional Sessions Judge.
7 Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed, having
no merit.
(Arvind Singh Chandel, J)
M.E.H./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.08.2024
Transmission Date 20.08.2024
