JUDGMENT 1. - By this criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.RC., the petitioners have challenged the order dated 24.6.2004 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Merta (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter) in Sessions Case No. 17/03, wherein the trial court framed charges against petitioner No. 1 Bhanwar Lal for the offences under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act of 1989') and against petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram for offence under Section 307 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the order impugned. I have carefully gone through the challan papers and the statements of complainant and other prosecution witnesses as also injury reports of complainant Banshi Lal and Smt. Kamla. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the First Information Report was registered for the offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989 and after investigation, the police filed challan against petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram for the offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Apt of 1989 and against petitioner No. 1 Bhanwar Lal for the offence under Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989. The trial court, without there being any material on record, framed the charges for the offences under Sections 307 and 307/34 I PC' and Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State could not support the order impugned passed by the trial court. 5. I have carefully gone through the statement of complainant Banshi Lal recorded under Section 161 Cr.RC., wherein he stated that petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram caused injuries to his wife Smt. Kamla by driving the jeep at a great speed and negligently. He further stated that there was altercation between the complainant and the petitioners and for that reason accident was caused. Smt. Kamla in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC. stated that the jeep was driven by petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram and petitioner No. 1 Bhanwar Lal was sitting in front of the jeep. He further stated that there was altercation between the complainant and the petitioners and for that reason accident was caused. Smt. Kamla in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC. stated that the jeep was driven by petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram and petitioner No. 1 Bhanwar Lal was sitting in front of the jeep. The said jeep hit her husband Banshi Lal and thereafter to herself as a result of which she fell on stone and suffered injuries. After the said accident, she and her husband were taken to the Government Hospital, Makrana. At the time of causing of the accident, there were many villagers and she had named certain villagers, who witnessed the said accident. She further stated that the villagers, who gathered there, warned petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram not to drive the jeep at a great speed and negligently in the village. Complainant Banshi Lal and his wife Smt Kamla suffered following injuries. Banshi Lal: 1. Tenderness Left deltoid region of Arm Simple Blunt 2. Tenderness Lateral side of left middle ⅓ Simple Blunt 3. Abrasion 0.5cm X 0.2cm Right leg Simple Blunt Smt. Kamla 1. Abrasion 1.0cm X 1.0cm Occipital region Simple of scalp Blunt 2. Lacerated wound 5.4cm x 3.6cm upto Analcaval Just right to anus after chemical evaluation Blunt 6. From the perusal of the injury reports of Banshilal and Smt. Kamla it appears that none of them suffered any bony injury and said injuries are simple in nature by blunt object. I have carefully gone through the statements of other witnesses recorded by the police. On close scrutiny of the statements of injured Banshi Lal and Smt. Kamla as also other witnesses, there is prima facie evidence that petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram caused simple injuries to Banshi Lal and Smt. Kamla, by driving jeep at a great speed, rashly and negligently and, therefore, prima facie no offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 or Section 307 IPC is made out against the petitioners. There is no evidence that the petitioners @ intended to cause murder of injured persons. 7. Looking to the nature of the injuries suffered by the injured which are simple in nature by blunt object and the manner in which the occurrence took place, it cannot be said that the petitioners intended to cause murder of complainant Banshi Lal and his wife Smt. Kamla. 7. Looking to the nature of the injuries suffered by the injured which are simple in nature by blunt object and the manner in which the occurrence took place, it cannot be said that the petitioners intended to cause murder of complainant Banshi Lal and his wife Smt. Kamla. However, there is prima facie evidence that by driving the jeep at a great speed and negligently petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram caused injuries to Banshi Lal and his wife Smt. Kamla, who are the members of Scheduled Caste and, therefore, offences under Sections 279 and 337 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989 is made out against petitioner No. 2 and against petitioner No. 1 for offence under Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989. 8. In the circumstances, therefore, the order of the trial court framing charges for the offences under Sections 307/34 against petitioner No. 1 Bhanwar Lal and Section 307 IPC against petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. 9. Consequently, the revision petition is partly allowed and order dated 24.6.2004 passed by the trial court framing charges against petitioner No. 1 Bhanwar Lal for offence under Section 307/34 IPC, and against petitioner No. 2 Baldeva Ram for offence under Section 307 IPC is set aside and the trial court is directed to frame the charge afresh against petitioner No. 2 for the offences under Sections 279, 337 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989 and against petitioner No. 1 under Section 3(i)(x) of the Act of 1989 and proceed with the trial in accordance with the law.Revision partly allowed. *******