IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39218 of 2009 MD.RIZWAN KHAN @ RIZWAN KHAN, SON OF NIZAMUDDIN KHAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATHILA, P.S. KORAN SARAI, DISTRICT BUXAR. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. MD. ISHAK KHAN, SON OF TASHAUR KHAN, BANGLADESHI, PRESENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATHILA, P.S. KORAN SARAI, DISTRICT BUXAR. 3. ASHFAK KHAN @ LADAN SON OF MD. ISHAK KHAN 4. MD. AKBAR @ BABAN SON OF MD. ISHAK KHAN 5. MEHRU NISHA WIFE OF MD. ISHAK KHAN 6. ISHRAT JAHAN DAUGHTER OF ISHAK KHAN 7. RESHMA KHATOON DAUGHTER OF ISHAK KHAN, BENGLA DESHI, PRESENT ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATHILA, P.S. KORAN SARAI, DISTRICT BUXAR. 8. SHEKH AJMULLA SON OF SHEKH JAMAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATHILA, P.S. KORAN-SARAI, DISTRICT BUXAR. ---- OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 2 22.12.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed on behalf of the complainant against the order dated 8.8.2001 passed in C.R. Case No. 580 of 1992/Tr. Case No. 478 of 2001 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Buxar by which the application filed to include Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code has been rejected. There is a case and counter case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is apparent that the complainant was surrounded by two persons and there are two injuries on the head and others are on the vital part of the body indicates the intention of the accused persons. It is also submitted that besides the injuries on the head, there were 12 other injuries on the body and if the mother of the complainant had not interfered and had not tried to stop the accused persons from assaulting, it was likely that very serious and grievous injuries would have been inflicted on the complainant. It is submitted that the Court 2 has erred in not considering the actual allegations in the First Information Report and the Medical Report which supports the prosecution version. These aspects have been considered by the Court below. There is no illegality in the reasoning of the Court below. It is well settled that the Court can alter or add new charges at any time before passing the judgment. It would be open to the Court to include Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code if the Court finds that there is sufficient material against the opposite parties to substantiate the submissions raised on behalf of the complainant. At this stage this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order. This application is dismissed. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)