SB Cr.rev.pet.No.974/10. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B.CR.REVISION PETITION NO.974/2010. Abdul Hafij Vs. State of Rajasthan Date of order : August 18, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Dileep Singh Jadaun for the petitioner. Shri Laxman Meena Public Prosecutor for State. ****** This revision petition has been filed by the complainant-petitioner assailing the order of the Court of Sessions dated 4/8/2010. By the said order, the trial court has rejected the application filed by the complainant u/S.311 Cr.P.C. to recall the Medical Officer PW3- Dr.Hemlata Tatwal, who has examined the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that wrong opinion by overwriting was given by the said doctor about Injury No.3 in the x-ray report that this injury was simple in nature. Learned Public Prosecutor has argued that during the cross-examination, a specific query was put by the counsel for petitioner from the medical officer whether or not Injury No.3 could be caused by fall, which she denied. Trial court therefore observed that recalling of the medical officer is not necessary. SB Cr.rev.pet.No.974/10. 2 Having heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for State and perusing the relevant documents placed before me, I find that whether or not injury on bone deep occipital parietal region resulting into fracture of skull would in every circumstances be taken as grievous injury, can be exhibited before the court by use of other opinion from the Medical Jurisprudence contrary to the statement of PW3-Dr.Hemlata Tatwal that Injury No.3 despite being fracture was simple in nature. Trial court would not be bound by that opinion and may always take its own view of the matter if otherwise persuaded on the basis of such material. At this stage, when the medical officer has already been examined and has also been subjected to cross-examination, I do not deem it necessary to recall him. In the result, revision petition fails and is hereby dismissed however with the above observations. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil