JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal revision petition u/s 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by accused petitioners against the order dated 9.7.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Distt. & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Sikar in Sessions Case No. 29/2003 whereby charges for offences u/ss. 447, 323, 323/34, 324, 324/34, 325/34, 307, 307/34 have been framed against them. 2. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that a case for the offences u/ss. 447, 323, 323/34, 324, 324/34, 325/34, 307 and 307/34 came to be registered on the basis of Parcha bayan of injured Lal Chand which was recorded on 7.2.2003 wherein he alleged that at about 8.00 a.m. he was sitting along with his elder brother Ganesh Ram and mother Gordhan Devi in the court-yard of their house. Vimla, the daughter of his brother was sweeping the house with a broom. The sons of his uncle Ramlal, Jagdish, Rughnath and Dwarka to Prasad came there and started beating his wife, his niece Subita. When his brother Ganesh Ram tried to rescue them, they gave him beating with lathi and axe. In the meanwhile Ramlal, his wife Rukma, Jamna and Sua. Banwari and Girraj came there with lathis and started beating his brother Ganesh Ram, mother Gordhan Devi, his wife Sua. When he tried to intervene and rescue them, Ramlal and Jagdish have lathi blow on his head. On hearing their hue and cry, Jagdish, their neighbour came there. Upon this the accused persons went away. In this occurrence Mst. Gordhan Devi received an injury with a blunt weapon and another with a sharp edged weapon. Lal Chand received two abrasions and a lacerated wound. Ganesh Ram received one injury with blunt weapon which on X-ray examination was found to be grievous in nature. Mohini received a abrasion. Sua received a lacerated wound with blunt weapon. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the incident has taken place all of a sudden and the nature of injuries received by the injured persons also do not indicate that any injury has been inflicted to any of the injured which is dangerous to life According to him, looking to the nature of injuries which the petitioners are alleged to have inflicted, their intention cannot be to cause death of any of them. He has, therefore, argued that the learned trial court has wrongly framed charges for the offences u/s 307 and 307/34 I.P.C. against the petitioner there being no valid ground for the same 4. Learned P.P. has tried to support the order of the learned court blow. 5. I have perused the impugned order as well as the record placed before me. 6. Having regard to the materials on record particularly, the sudden origin of the incident and the nature of injuries, it cannot be said that the intention of the petitioners was to cause death of Ganesh Ram or anybody else. Ganesh Ram has received one fracture of right frontal and parietal bone. This lacerated wound is 3cm X 1cm X 1/2cm. The doctor has not opined that this was dangerous to life or sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause his death. 7. In this view of the matter, therefore, the charge framed against the accused for the offence u/ss. 307 and 307/34 I.PC. cannot be sustained and they deserve to be discharged of these offences. 8. Consequently, this revision petition is allowed and the charge for the offences u/s 307 and 307/34 I.P.C. against the petitioners is hereby quashed. But the remaining charges against them shall stand as such. Learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Sikar shall pass appropriate orders transferring the case u/s 228 Cr.PC. to the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate for trial as per law.Charges U/s 34, 307 Quashed - Case Directed to be Transferred to Court of Magistrate. *******