Judgment ( 1. ) Case is listed in default. ( 2. ) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in particulars of crime the date of order has mentioned as 23/3/2010, while in fact it is 18/3/2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be permitted to correct the date of order. ( 3. ) Prayer is allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to correct the date of order during course of the day. ( 4. ) Heard on merits. Being aggrieved by the order dated 18.3.2010 passed by XVII Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in S.T.No. 209/2010, whereby the charge has been framed against the petitioners for an offence alleged to have been committed under sections 332 and 307/34, IPC, present petition has been filed. ( 5. ) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that learned Courts below committed error in framing the charges against the petitioners. It is submitted that injured Devendra Markam and Rajan Uaike are constables, but one of them were on duty. It is submitted that looking to the nature of injury as medical report Ex.P/8 and Ex. P/9 are simple in nature. It is submitted that petition filed by the petitioners be allowed and the impugned order passed by learned Sessions Court be set aside. ( 6. ) Shri GS. Chouhan, learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that the injured Devendra Markam and Raj an Uaika are Constables and at that time, they were on duty. It is submitted that no illegality has been committed by the learned Sessions Court in framing the charge. It is submitted that petition be dismissed. ( 7. ) After taking into consideration all the facts and keeping in view the fact that the injuries sustained by the constables are simple in nature, the impugned order whereby the charge has been framed under section 307, IPC is set aside with a direction to the learned Court below to re-frame the charge after taking into consideration all the facts of case and nature of injuries sustained by the injured persons. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of.