JUDGMENT The accused applicants (two in number) are charged under section 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and are facing trial. According to the prosecution on 11.9.1990 at about 12.50 hours in the night, when Ballu Raj Kumar Tiwari, the complainant, with one Raju Agarwal was going towards his residence, he was attacked by the applicants near Pan Dariba by means of sword and knife. The applicant No. 1 Ballu assaulted the complainant by sword and caused injury on the leg and also received injury to his left palm, middle finger and right finger. At the same time petitioner No. 2 Sanjiv alias Sanjay assaulted the complainant by knife and caused petitioner No. 1 assaulted the complainant and caused incised wound to the right side of the chest. On medical examination the doctor has opined that the injuries caused are simple in nature. On the basis of the medical evidence it is argued by the counsel for the applicants that there was neither an intention nor knowledge to cause death of the complainant and, therefore, the charge under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code should not have been framed. At the initial stage of the framing of the charge the Court is not required to consider evidence placed, with meticulous certainty. The appreciation of the evidence at the time of the framing of the charge and that at the time of trial is quite different. The evidence led by the prosecution even if raises a grave suspicion that accused are involved in the commission of the crime then it is sufficient for the Court to frame the charge. To justify conviction under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code it is not necessary that the bodily injury caused is capable of causing death although the nature of injury may be sufficient guideline at the time of deciding a case as to the nature of the offence committed by the accused persons. There is a distinction between an act of the accused and its result. The Court has to see whether the act irrespective of its result was done with the intention or knowledge and under the circumstances mentioned in section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. There is a distinction between an act of the accused and its result. The Court has to see whether the act irrespective of its result was done with the intention or knowledge and under the circumstances mentioned in section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The evidence on record establishes that two persons have attacked the complainant with knife and sword they have caused the incised wound to the complainant on the chest two injuries have been caused on the right thigh and one on the left thigh. Arms used are knife and sword, attack was made without any provocation. These facts do indicate prima facie intention of the applicants required for constituting an offence under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. On Overall appreciation of the evidence on record, I am of the opinion that the trial Court has not committed any error in framing the charge under section 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Consequently, this revision fails and is dismissed.