Criminal Revision No. 1410 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1410 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.8.2009 Guddi .. Petitioner v. Devender Singh and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. J. S. Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate for the respondents. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 18.4.2009, passed by the learned court below, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for amendment of charge was dismissed. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner filed a criminal complaint in the court on 31.7.2007 for alleged fight which took place on 15.4.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a matter of record that Jagram was hit by a sharp edged weapon on the left side of the chest, where all vital organs are there in the body. He was survived by God's blessings. A case under Section 307 IPC was clearly made out and the learned court below fell in error in not framing charge against the respondents under Section 307 IPC. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in fact the alleged injury was self inflicted which was ultimately found to be simple in nature. There was no medical report to support the case of the petitioner. In fact, filing of complaint was merely a counter blast to the FIR registered against the petitioner's party in which father of respondent No. 1 had died and they were facing trial under Section 302 IPC. Even in the complaint filed by the petitioner, there was no mention of Section 307 IPC. After framing of the charge on 17.3.2009, no material has come on record in the form of evidence, which can justify invocation of Section 307 IPC. The order framing charge attained finality as the same was not challenged further. Criminal Revision No. 1410 of 2009 [2] After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in the present petition. Admittedly, the petitioner's party is facing trial on account of murder of father of respondent No. 1. For the alleged injuries suffered by the petitioner in the same fight, criminal complaint was filed in the court more than 3 months thereafter. No material on record has been referred to submit that the injury was found to be grievous as even the doctor, who was produced in preliminary evidence, has not stated anything about the same. By the time the complaint was filed, everything was in knowledge of the petitioner, but still there was no mention of Section 307 IPC. In the medico-legal report, the doctor has not opined about the grievousness of the injury. Another discrepancy, which is available on record, is that though initially Devender is stated to have caused injury on the chest of Jagram, but later on he had inflicted injuries to Jagan and Jagram with a lathi taken from another person. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find that any case for framing of charge against the respondents under Section 307 IPC is made out. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 17.8.2009 mk