Court No. - 50 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2513 of 2010 Petitioner :- Ved Prakash Agrawal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Petitioner Counsel :- Gaurav Kakkar Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shyam Shankar Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This revision has been preferred by the revisionist against the order dated
20.5.2010 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr in Case
No. 6083/09 relating to case Crime No. 885/09 under sections 337/338/308
and 27/30 Arms Act P.S. Kotwali Nagar District Bulandshahr.
It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionist that there was no
sufficient material on record to justify the impugned order as from the
evidence of the witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded by the
Investigating Officer, no case u/s 308 I.P.C. was made out. Neither the
evidence of injured himself nor her husband stated about any actual intention
of the accused to kill the injured nor there was any medical report to support
that any internal part was damaged by the alleged injury. There was no
justification for the learned Magistrate to include section 308 I.P.C. against
the accused.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the contentions.
Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and
perused the evidence on record. From a perusal of the statements of the
witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. including that of doctor who had prepared
medical report it appears that neither there is any internal damage caused to
the injured nor there was any previous enmity between the parties nor there
was any intention to cause fire arm injury to the injured. Firing was done on
the occasion of a function. Moreover charge sheet was submitted u/s 337/338
I.P.C. No application has been moved by the Public Prosecutor before the
learned Magistrate to commit the case u/s 308 I.P.C. to the court of Sessions.
It was only on the application of the complainant the impugned order has been
passed by the learned Magistrate.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances no case u/s 308 I.P.C. was
made out against the accused. Neither charge sheet was submitted under that
section nor the medical report supported the contention of the complainant.
The finding of the learned Magistrate for prima facie case u/s 308 I.P.C. does
not appear to be justified.
Accordingly the revision is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The
learned Magistrate is directed to proceed with the trial under the sections
which are mentioned in the charge sheet at present.
Order Date :- 9.7.2010
GNY