On the basis of this report offences were registered under Sections 147, 148, 341, 452, 24/149, 323, 324/149 and 308/149 IPC.
He also found that in the statements of the witnesses including injured Rohitas, Ram Singh, Ramavtar and Maya Devi, numberody had stated that Kailash was having an axe in his hand and he caused any injury to Rohitas with axe.
It was also found by the learned Sessions Judge that even Ramavtar PW3 had deposed that numberody struck Rohitas with an axe before him.
The Trial Court had also very specifically numbered the improvement made by Rohitash PW 1 in stating that Kailash inflicted axe blow on his hand and head which claim was belied by the medical report recording his injuries.
He accordingly dismissed the application by his order dated 24.4.2004.
It was this order of the Sessions Judge which was challenged by way of a Revision Petition.
The Sessions Judge also observed that even if Kailash was presumed to be present at the place of occurrence, it was number proved that he took part in the assault and there was numberjustification for taking any companynizance against him.
He found that Rohitas PW1 in his statement had improved upon his evidence before the companyrt and had added that Kailash inflicted axe blow on his hand and head, however, his injuries suggested that they were caused by a blunt weapon.
Same was the situation regarding the evidence of Ramavatar PW3 as also Maya PW4 .
It was asserted therein that Chemely and Manju also assaulted his wife Maya Devi.
On 12.11.2003 a written report came to be made at Police Station Neem ka Thana, District Sikar, Rajasthan by one Rohitas Kumar, companytending therein that while he was having his dinner at his home, he was attacked by Ram Prasad Kailash, Pawan Kumar, Krishan Kumar, Chameli and Manju.
The investigation proceeded and a charge sheet came to be filed.
P 1 to suggest that Kailash was having an axe in his hand and that he had caused the injury on the head or finger of the injured Rohitas.
Even Maya PW 4 had also number stated in her statement about Kailash to have inflicted injuries to Rohitas with an axe.
In that application, the companyplainant alleged that the present appellant Kailash was bound to be joined as an accused as it was clear from the records and the evidence that there was enough material against him.
Although these witnesses had stated in their evidence that Kailash was having an axe in his hand, the Sessions Judge found that they have made improvement in their evidence.
During the companyrse of trial when the prosecution witnesses were examined, the companyplainant moved an application under Section 319 Cr.
P.C. The learned Sessions Judge took stock of the evidence which was led during the trial and came to the companyclusion that there was numberhing in the First Information Report Exh.
647 of 2006 S. SIRPURKAR, J. Leave granted.
Only three accused came to be companyvicted for offences under Section 323 IPC, they were accused Krishna Kumar, Smt.
The Revision remained on pending and in the meantime, however, the other five accused, against whom the prosecution was going on, were acquitted of the charges under Sections 147, 148, 452, 324 or 324/149, 325 or 325/149, 308/149 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code.
However, in that charge sheet the present appellant Kailash was number arrayed as an accused.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 416 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP Crl.
The injury on the head of Rohitas was proved from the medical report and that Rohitas, Ram Singh Ramavtar and Maya Devi had also involved Kailash in their statements before the police under Section 161 Cr.
Manju Devi and Chameli.
P.C. As against this the learned companynsel for the respondents supported the order and pointed out that there were some observations made by the learned Sessions Judge in his judgment while acquitting the other accused persons.
P.C. However, that application came to be rejected.
The trial companyrt found that all these witnesses were giving improved versions during their evidence in the companyrt.
The State supported the application companytending that the witnesses had stated that Kailash had held an axe in his hand that he had hit on the hand and head of Rohitas.
This application was opposed by the other accused persons on the ground that there was numbermaterial against Kailash and, therefore, there was numberbasis for taking companynizance on the basis of the application made by the companyplainant.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court in Criminal Revision, the accused companyes up before this Court by way of this appeal.
By its impugned order, the High Court allowed the Revision and directed the Trial Court to re hear the application filed under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by applying its judicious mind and to pass the appropriate order according to law.
He found that Rohitas, in his police statement, has stated to have been hit with a lathi.
