IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40451 of 2009 1. Ram Pratap Singh, son of Late Sadhu Singh, 2. Surendra Pratap Singh @ Binod Singh, son of Ram Pratap Singh, 3. Sanjay Kumar Singh, son of Ram Ekbal Singh, 4. Ram Suresh Singh, son of Raghupati Singh, all of village Samahuta, Ps Kochas (Parasthua), Dist. Rohtas. 5. Birendra Dubey, 6. Ramakant Dubey,, both sons of Late Kamlapati Dubey, 7. Jitendra Kumar Dubey, son of Dinanath Dubey, residents of village Sohawalia (Kalan), PS Kargahar (Sidhi), District Rohtas – petitioners. Vs. The State of Bihar. 2 16.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order, dated 5.11.2009 passed by the Additional District Judge II, Rohtas in Sessions Trial No. 451/2007 by which the petition filed by the petitioners under section 228(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on plain reading of the F.I.R. it would appear that there is allegation that the accused persons used fire arms at the place of occurrence. It is submitted that in fact there is no allegation that the firing took place for the purpose to kill any one and as such offences under section 307 of the Penal Code are not made out. The allegation whether there was a firing with intention to kill any person would be a matter of evidence and cannot be decided at this stage. If the court below finds that in fact there is insufficient evidence to show that the petitioners are guilty under section 307 of the Penal Code, it would always be open to the court to alter the charges or to punish the petitioners for a lesser offence or if there is no 2 offence against the petitioners, should acquit them. I, thus, find that there is no illegality in the impugned order. This application is dismissed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)