Lakhbir Singh @ Billa vs State of Punjab

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.—Petitioner Lakhbir Singh has filed this criminal revision against the order dated 5.10.2005, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge (Adhoc) cum Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Roper, vide which charge under Sections 307, 427, 186, 332, 353 IPC, 61 of the Excise Act and 181/192 Motor Vehicles Act has been framed against the Petitioner and his co-accused Kamaljit Singh alias Lally.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that from the challan and the material collected by the police during the investigation, no prima facie case u/s 307 IPC is made out against the Petitioner. At the time of the alleged occurrence, he was not driving the car. He was sitting in the co- driver seat and the car was being driven by his co-accused Kamaljit Singh alias Lally. As per the prosecution version, when the police party gave signal to stop the car at the barrier laid by the police, the car did not stop and ran over PHG Avtar Singh, who sustained injuries. Learned Counsel submits that in the instant case, the injuries received by Avtar Singh are simple in nature and are on the non-vital part of the body, therefore, no offence u/s 307 IPC is made out. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the order of charge passed by the trial court is non-speaking, as no reason has been recorded and the contention of the Petitioner has not been dealt with.

After hearing learned Counsel for the Petitioner and going through the contents of the Petitioner, I do not find any substance in the instant petition. It has been alleged that the Petitioner and his co-accused tried to run over the person, who gave signal to stop the car at the barrier, while not stopping the car. For the offence u/s 307 IPC, it is not the nature of injuries caused to the injured, but intention or knowledge of the accused, which is to be taken into consideration. At this stage, this question cannot be gone into which is subject matter of the evidence during the trial. It is also well settled that while framing charge, the trial court is not required to give reasons. The details reasons are required to be given only when the order of discharge is passed.

Dismissed.

Petition dismissed.