Mukeem and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 7623 of 2025

¶3

Mukeem And 2 Others

¶4

.....Revisionist(s)

¶5


State of U.P. and Another			.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Revisionist(s)	:	Mohd.	Aslam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	:	G.A.
Court No.- 91

¶6

HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The instant criminal revision has been filed against the impugned order dated 28.8.2025 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Deoband, Saharanpur, in Sessions Case No. 92 of 2025 (State Vs. Mukeem and others) arising out case crime no. 479 of 2023, under Sections 148, 308, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Deoband, District Saharanpur.

¶9

According to the prosecution version, first informant/opposite party no. 2/Salim had lodged an FIR alleging therein that on 08/09/2023 at about 7 PM, he along with his brother Naeem and Urjahan were sitting at home talking when my brother Mukeem son of Sagir along with Saddadam son of Ninna, resident of Datoli Mugal, and Arif, Asif and Nargis, wife of Mukeem, came holding sticks, rods and an iron rod and started abusing. When we objected, all of them together started beating us, due to which he and his brother Naeem received several injuries. Due to the injuries, my brother Naeem became unconscious and has still not regained consciousness. On hearing the noise, many people including Shokat son of Liaqat, Alam, Kaleem arrived and saved us. While leaving, all the accused threatened to kill us. The FIR was promptly registered on the same day at 10.16 p.m. against the named accused persons, namely, Mukeem, Saddam, Arif, Asif and Nargis.

¶10

Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that nature of the injuries is not sufficient for framing charge under Section 308 IPC. There are four injured persons in the said incident. He has further drawn the attention of this Court towards the supplementary report of the injured/Naim. According to which, the injured was admitted in the medical college on 10.9.2023 and he was consistently hospitalized and on the request of him, he was discharged on 21.9.2023. Thereafter he was consistent in the medical treatment along with hospitalization. He has suffered injuries on head. As per NCCT Head, he has suffered three injuries (i. extradural hemarrohage in

¶11

CRLR No. 7623 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

left parietal and left temporal region. ii. Hemorrhagic contusion in left basofrontal and bilateral temporal region. iii. Bleed in sphenoid sinus. iv. Fracture of left parietotemporal bone and left greater wing of sphenoid bone.) The aforesaid injuries are on the head as well as on the noes of the injured and his skull bone was also got fractured.

¶14

As per injury report of Nadeem, he has suffered two injuries (i. T.S. 3cm x 2cm on the back of left elbow joint. ii. Complaint of pain on the right abdomen.)

¶15

As per the injury report of Naim, he has sustained five injuries which are as follows:

¶16

i. L.W. 2cm x 0.3cm x muscle deep on the Lt side of forehead 2cm above Lt eyebrow with T.S. 3cm x 2cm around the wound (K.U.O.).

¶17

ii. L.W. 3 cm x 1cm on the left side of head upto bone deep 7cm above left year(KUO).

¶18

iii T.S. 5 cm x 3 cm on the all around the left eye.

¶19

iv L.W 2.5cm x 0.3cm into muscle deep on the left side of head 3 cm above Lt ear.

¶20

v. Bleeding through both ear.

¶21

From perusal of the record, it reveals that the FIR has been lodged promptly. The injured has suffered serious injuries on the head which is a vital part. Any injury on the head could be fatal and the skull of the injured Naim was also got fractured. Learned trial court has taken the cognizance and also framed the charge. There is no sufficient ground to discharge the revisionists under Section 308 IPC. Therefore, neither there is any illegality nor irregularity in the impugned order and the criminal revision is liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed accordingly.

¶22

November 26, 2025

¶23

M. Tarik

¶24

(Abdul Shahid,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MOHD TARIK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukeem and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukeem and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gulab Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Tiwari vs State of Up and Another

Nitin Agarwal and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vinod vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod vs State of U.P. and Another