Dismissed

Prabhdeep Singh v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC3 May 2017CR.R/88/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses criminal revision petitions challenging the framing of charges against petitioners. The court holds that impugned orders are interlocutory and not maintainable in revision, citing Supreme Court precedent, and notes sufficient medical evidence for grievous injury.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed with direction that observations confined to this disposal and shall not impact merits of the case.

Prabhdeep Singh Vs State of Hp — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

¶2

Cr.Rev. No. 88 of 2017 a/w Cr. Rev. Nos. 89 and 90 of 2017.

¶3

Decided on: 03.05.2017.

¶4

1. Cr. Revision No. 88 of 2017.
Prabhdeep Singh Versus State of H.P.	……Petitioner. …….Respondent.
2. Cr. Revision No. 89 of 2017.
Prabhsimran Versus State of H.P.	……Petitioner. …….Respondent.
3. Cr. Revision No. 88 of 2017.
Gurpreet Singh Versus	……Petitioner.
State of H.P.	…….Respondent.

¶5

Coram

¶6

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ .Yes

¶7

For the petitioner(s): Mr. M.S.Jandiala, Advocate. For the respondent(s): Mr. Parmod Thakur, Addl. AG with Mr. Rajiv Jiwan, Advocate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J (Oral).

¶8

This judgment shall dispose of the present criminal revision petition and also the connected petitions filed by the petitioners, arising out of FIR No. 49 of 2016, registered against them in Police Station Dalhousie, District Chamba.

¶9

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

¶11

It is seen that the Investigating Agency has filed the final report and the case registered as P.C. No. 45 of 2016 is pending disposal in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P. Learned trial Court, on finding a prima-facie case made out against the accused petitioners, has framed charge against them under Sections 326, 307 IPC with the aid of Section 149 IPC and also under Section 147 IPC again with the aid of Section 149 IPC. The charge, so framed against them is Annexure P-1.

¶12

The legality and validity of the framing of the charge against the accused-petitioners has been assailed on the grounds that the injury sustained by Sh. Nagesh Mahajan, the victim of the occurrence, being not on vital part of his body and being on his hand was not dangerous to life. Also that the opinion of the Medical Officer based upon the treatment of the victim of the occurrence in some private hospital cannot be relied upon. 4. This petition is not maintainable, as an order framing charge against the accused being interlocutory, cannot be assailed by invoking the revisional jurisdiction. It is held so by a Larger Bench of the Apex Court in V.C.Shukla vs. State through C.B.I. , AIR 1980 SC 962 . A Coordinate Bench of this Court has also taken similar view of the matter in Bagga

¶13

Singh vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and another , 1977 Cri. L. J.

¶14

301 . On merits also, the order framing charge cannot be said to be illegal by any stretch of imagination for the reason that the doctor who attended upon the victim of the occurrence in Civil Hospital, Dalhousie, in his opinion, termed the nature of the injury not only grievous but also dangerous to life. I have perused the MLC, which on the file of the police

¶15

¶16

has been produced for perusal of this Court by learned Addl. Advocate General. Therefore, prima-facie, case is made out under Section 307 IPC and as such, learned trial Judge has not committed any illegality or irregularity while framing charge under Sections 326, 307 and 147 with the aid of Section 149 IPC. The petitions, as such, are dismissed. Any observations made hereinabove, shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition and shall have no reflection on the merits of the case of either party.

¶17

An authenticated copy of this judgment be sent to learned trial

¶18

Court for being taken on record and for compliance.

¶19

May 03, 2017, ( Dharam Chand Chaudhary ), (karan-) Judge.

Prabhdeep Singh v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhdeep Singh v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Devi alias Nittu Vs Kapil Chadha

Roshan Lal Vs State of Hp

Varinder Kumar Vs Rajiv Sethi

Khyalu Ram Vs Mangla Nand

Ram Kali Vs Soma Devi

Ajay Kumar Vs The Director National Institute of Open Schooling