1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 2087 of 2009 Date of Decision: 12.8.2009 *** Gurmukh Singh & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab. .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Kuldeep Sanwal, Advocate for the petitioners. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The present petitioners are aggrieved with the order dated 6.7.2009 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala by dint of which charges under Section 307, 326, 324, 323, 148 read with Section 149 IPC have been ordered to be framed against them. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the offence under Section 307 IPC is not attracted in this case, as a result, the police did not present the challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against some of the accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC, but the learned trial Court, charged the petitioners under aforesaid Section aditionally. The contention is meritless. A bare perusal of the impugned order shows that the Court below while taking into account the statements of the complainant and injured, recorded by the police as also the other material collected during investigation, rightly ordered for framing of charges for the aforesaid Sections, against the petitioners. The Court at the stage of framing of charges does not evaluate evidence to determine its correctness, credibility or worth its legality or validity. It merely sifts and weigh evidence for a limited purpose namely whether there is sufficient evidence on record to warrant framing charges. It is also well settled that the Court is not bound with the investigation report to conclude that offence 2 under Section 307 IPC is not made out and it has to apply its judicial mind to held otherwise, which has been done in the present case. The plea that there is conflict in the opinion of the doctors with regard to the nature of injury, shall be adjudicated only during the trial. It cannot be said that the order passed by the trial court suffers from any infirmity. The revision petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed accordingly. However, nothing observed hereinabove shall have any bearing on the merits of the case. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE August 12,2009 Jiten