Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29353 of 2011 (2) dt.28-09-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.29353 of 2011 ====================================================== 1. Pramod Yadav S/O Shankar Yadav, R/O Vill.- Bhour Nawarattan Tola, P.S.- Pandaul, Distt.- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Ram Swaroop Yadav S/O Late Kalu Yadav, R/O Vill.- Bhour (Utar Tola), P.S.- Pandaul, Distt.- Madhubani. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kr. Bhaskar, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kr. Jha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.N. Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 28-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In this case, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 6.6.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Madhubani in Cr. Rev. No. 248 of 2011 whereby he has affirmed the order dated 25.3.2011 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in G. R. No. 469/2010 in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 23/2010. It appears from the record that the court of Magistrate vide order dated 29.6.2010 had taken cognizance under [STATUTE] and other allied Sections. That was challenged before the Revisional Court in Cr. Rev. No. 759/2010 vide order dated 22.1.2011 remanded back the matter for Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29353 of 2011 (2) dt.28-09-2012 reconsideration to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. On remand, the matter was again heard, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 25.3.2011 again took cognizance under [STATUTE] which was challenged before the Revisional Court in Cr. Rev. No. 248 of 2011 and the same has been dismissed. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the Police after investigation did not submit charge sheet [STATUTE] ase [STATUTE] ourt will not consider the defence of the petitioner rather the same will be considered during the trial. As both courts below prima facie found that the offence [STATUTE] inclined to interfere with the order impugned. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to raise all points before the court below at the appropriate stage. Mahesh/- (Shivaji Pandey, 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.