Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1087 of 2010 ====================================================== Brahmanand Mishra S/o late Gautam Mishra, R/o village- Bhodasa, P.S.- Ekma, District- Saran at Chapra .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. Vivekanand Mishra S/o Sachidanand Mishra 2. Vikrama Pandey S/o late Ramagya Pandey 3. Vinod Pandey S/o Vikrama Pandey 4. Raju Pandey S/o Vikrama Pandey 5. Ranjit Pandey S/o Hridaya Pandey 6. Amitabh Pandey S/o Mohan Pandey 7. Shivnath Pandey S/o late Anup Pandey 8. Raj Kishore Pandey S/o Kapil Pandey 9. Jitendra Pandey S/o Bhirgu Pandey, all are R/o Bhodasa, P.S.-Ekma, District- Saran 10. The State of Bihar---------------------------Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Baban Roy, Advocate For the State of Bihar : Mr. Uma Nath Mishra, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 03-08-2012 Heard. By the impugned order dated 16.4.2010 passed in Sessions Trial No. 728 of 2008 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. III, Saran at Chapra, while exercising powers under section 228 (1) (a) Cr.P.C. the learned trial court has come to a finding that no case under [STATUTE] . is made out against accused-opposite party Nos. 1 to 9 and remaining offences are exclusively triable by the learned magistrate. Therefore, the record of the case was directed to be transmitted to the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra for framing charge Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1087 of 2010 (2) dt.03-08-2012 2/3 against accused-opposite party nos. 1 to 9 for various others offences and for proceeding in the matter further in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as a matter of fact, charge under [STATUTE] . is made out against accused persons and the case ought not to have been remitted to the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and ought to have been tried by the learned sessions court itself. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State, this Court finds that the petitioner has a remedy before the learned magistrate under section 323 Cr.P.C. If the trial of the accused-opposite party nos. 1 to 9 proceeds and the prosecution produces evidence in support of the prosecution case and, if on the basis of the materials/evidence produced, the learned magistrate comes to a finding that the case at hand should be tried by the sessions court, then he can pass an appropriate order for committing the case to the court of sessions. On such commitment trial of the accused will have to be proceeded under provisions of Chapter XVIII Cr.P.C. In view of the fact that the petitioner has a remedy under section 323 Cr.P.C., this Court is not inclined to exercise its Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1087 of 2010 (2) dt.03-08-2012 3/3 revisional jurisdiction for interfering with the impugned order at this stage. The application stands disposed of with the observation made above. RPS/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 307

Statute Text:
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to murder. Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by Life Convicts: When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.