IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39674 of 2009 1. RAM AVTAR SINGH, S/O LATE RAMJAGGI SINGH, R/OVILL GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR.........................................................................Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. TEJ NARAYAN AHIR S/O LATE RAJ KISHORE AHIR, R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 3. MUNESHWAR AHIR S/O LATE RAJ KISHORE AHIR R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 4. RAM NARAYAN AHIR, S/O LATE NAND KISHORE SINGH, R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 5. HARI NARAYAN AHIR, S/O LATE NAND KISHORE SINGH, R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 6. CHHOTAK AHIR S/O LATE NAND KISHORE SINGH R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 7. LAXMAN AHIR, S/O RAM JANAM AHIR, R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 8. JAI PRAKASH AHIR S/O RAM JANAM AHIR R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 9. SRI NIWAS AHIR S/O LATE NAGINA AHIR R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 10. RAJENDRA AHIR, S/O MUNESHWAR AHIR, R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 11. ALOK AHIR, S/O TEJ NARAYAN AHIR, R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. 12. RAVI AHIR, S/O RAJENDRA AHIR R/O GOPINATHPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT- BUXAR. .................................Opposite Parties. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Digvijay Kumar Ojha, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Indu Bala Pandey, A.P.P. ---------- 2. 21.01.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 20.08.2009 by which the court below has rejected the petitioner-informant’s application to frame charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that the injuries do not indicate that a case is made out under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and that the X-ray report has not come on record. The petitioner has annexed the injury reports which are 2 Annexures-3 series. It appears that Ram Avtar Singh has received injury on his Index finger. It is said that Index finger shows fracture one of the bones in the Index finger. Similarly injury of Bishal Kumar indicates fracture of base of Metacarpal bone of his own thumb. On the basis of the aforesaid injury reports, the court below has held that no case is made out under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the court below has found the case fit for framing charge under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code which deals with the injuries which are said to be grievous in nature. In the result, I find no illegality in the order dated 20.08.2009 passed by J.M. Ist Class, Buxar in Trial No. 2159 of 2009. This application is dismissed. U.K. (Sheema Ali Khan,J)