Abhinav Sarup Sharma lodged a complaint with the police that on 2.4.2005, he went to drop his cousin sister (Buaji's daughter) in Ram Nagar, Tilak Nagar.At about 12.30 -1.00 P.M., while he was returning to his home, the present petitioner Sh.Raj Crl.P.228/2008 Page 1 of 8 Kumar Sharma who happens to be his Uncle came in front of him and hit him on the head with a baseball bat.P.228/2008 Page 1 of 8In the meantime, the grandfather of the complainant Anand Sarup Sharma also came out and shouted that Raj Kumar should eliminate the complainant.Raj Kumar is living in the adjoining portion to his sister's house, who happens to be the Bua of the complainant and whose daughter he had gone to drop.Two boys are alleged to have come out from the residence of Raj Kumar Sharma and started beating the complainant with leg and fist blows.The complainant started bleeding due to injuries as he was hit on the head with a baseball bat.The Uncle and the grandfather of the complainant caught hold of the two arms of the complainant while as the boys took out their belt and started hitting the same over the person of the complainant.Admittedly, in the present case, the attack on the complainant seems to be pre-planned as the same is fortified from the fact that the grandfather of the complainant himself shouted for taking the life of the complainant so that there is no one to chase the pending litigation between the petitioner and his father on the one side and the family of the complainant on the other.So far as the learned counsel for the complainant is concerned, he has contended that the nature of the injuries could not be said to be simple, as admittedly the MLC shows that the complainant had received six stitches and it was only providence which saved the complainant, otherwise the petitioner and his father were bent upon liquidating the complaint.P.228/2008 Page 4 of 8Through: Mr. M.N.Dudeja, APP Mr.A.S.Sharma, Adv.for the complainant.HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.K. SHALIWhether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?V.K. SHALI, J. (oral)The Uncle of the complainant shouted that since the complainant and his father are contesting litigation against the assailants therefore, if the complainant is eliminated, there will be no one to follow the cases.The wife of Raj Kumar is alleged to have thrown a brick which hit the complainant.The complainant was also hit on the back with the help of a hockey by the grandfather.As a consequence of the entire episode, the complainant is stated to have suffered injuries which were two Contused Lacerated Wounds of 2 Crl.P.228/2008 Page 2 of 8 cms x 0.5 cms and 1.5 cms x 0.5 cms over the mid frontal region of the scalp and the injuries were opined to be simple.P.228/2008 Page 2 of 8The investigating agency filed a charge sheet and the learned Sessions Judge on the basis of the statements and documents on record came to the conclusion that prima facie a case of attempt to culpable homicide is made out, therefore, the petitioner along with the other co-accused persons were charged for an offence under Section 308 IPC.The petitioner feeling aggrieved by this has assailed the said order.I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP and the learned counsel for the complainant who is also present.The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as the nature of injuries on the complainant are opined to be simple by the doctor, therefore, no charge u/S 308 IPC can be sustained.The petitioner in order to support her point has placed reliance on judgments titled Surinder Kumar Vs.State 1996 V AD (Delhi) 345 and P.K.Ghosh Vs.On the basis of these authorities, it has been contended that as in the present case as the injuries were simple and there was no intention or knowledge attributable to the petitioner that it could have resulted in homicide of the complainant, therefore, the charge could not have been framed.P.228/2008 Page 3 of 8P.228/2008 Page 3 of 8The learned APP has contested the arguments of the defence counsel and urged that merely because the nature of injuries are opined to be simple, it does not warrant the dilution of the charge from Section 308 IPC to one u/S 323 IPC.It has been contended that while considering a prima facie case as to whether a charge under Section 308 IPC is made out against the petitioner or not only the nature of injury is to be seen but even other attendant circumstances are also to be borne in mind.P.228/2008 Page 4 of 8I have carefully considered the submissions of all the parties and have also gone through the impugned order as well as the relevant documents.P.228/2008 Page 5 of 8The attack on the complainant was not on the spur of moment.

Cited provisions: Section 308 in The Indian Penal Code