IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.512 of 2009 ABDUL SABAB @ SABAB Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 26.3.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has come against the order dated 26.2.2009 by which his petition for discharge of an offence under section 307 of I.P.C. has been rejected by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Purnea, in K. Hatt P.S. Case No.393/08. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner threw bomb at the informant which injured her chest. It has further been alleged that this petitioner opened fire which also did not hit him. A case was registered under section 307/34 of the I.P.C. and 4/5 of Explosive Substance Act. The police submitted charge sheet under section 387 of I.P.C. The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance under section 307 of I.P.C. and 4/5 of Explosive Substance Act. The trial court rejected the case of the petitioner stating that there is sufficient evidence for framing charge under section 307 of I.P.C. The trial court is of the view that mere fact that fired shot did not hit the informant would not be sufficient to discharge the petitioner of the charge under section 307 of I.P.C. as it is well settled in a case of the State of Bihar vrs. Ramesh Prasad 1977 S.C. 2018 that charge can be framed on strong suspicion. In the result, there is no merit in this 2 application. The revision application is, thus, dismissed. Anilksinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)