Judgment U.C. Maheshwari, J. 1. The applicants/accused has preferred this revision under section 397 read with 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code being aggrieved by Order dated 11-1-2011 passed by the Court of Special Judge (constituted under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) (in short 'the Act'), Satna in S.T. No. 71/10 framing charges against them for the offence of sections 341, 294 (two counts), 307, 307/34, 323 (two counts),506-II of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(x) of the Act. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that the on dated 5-2-2010 at about 11 O' Clock in the night, the complainant Rambiswas Choudhary lodged the FIR at P.S. Singhpur district Satna contending that at about 9.30 in the night, victim Krishna Kumar Mishra was at his field situated near river Garda. Rajesh alias Bhaiya Chaturvedi, Achchelal Choudhary and Jainarayan were also sitting in the adjoining field. At the same time, when Krishna Kumar Mishra was coming from his motorcycle, on the way near the field known in the name of 'Paiha', said Rajesh alias Bhaiya lashed with Farsa, Achchelal lashed with an Axe, Dadoman and Jainarayan lashed with sticks stopped him and asked the whereabouts of the Sarpanch. On saying by Krishna Kumar that he does not know about him then all the aforesaid culprits by abusing him with filthy language started his beating. Achchelal Choudhary gave the blow of Axe on the head of the victim Krishna Kumar while the blow of Farsa was given on his head by Rajesh Chaturvedi. Applicant Dadoman and Jainarayan carried out his beating by means of sticks. When the complainant Rambishwas and Ramdhani went to rescue the victim Krishna Kumar then they were also subjected to beating by the applicants resultantly all victims had sustained injuries with bleeding on different parts of their persons. On their shouting, some of the villagers came there then by giving the criminal intimidation to kill the complainant and other injured, the applicants fled away. On the aforesaid report, the offence of sections 341, 294, 323 and 506-11 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the applicants. Subsequent to registration of the offence, the applicants were sent to the hospital where their MLC reports were prepared. Out of them, victim Krishna Kumar Mishra was referred for X-ray. On the aforesaid report, the offence of sections 341, 294, 323 and 506-11 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the applicants. Subsequent to registration of the offence, the applicants were sent to the hospital where their MLC reports were prepared. Out of them, victim Krishna Kumar Mishra was referred for X-ray. On carrying-out the same, the fracture of ulna bone of right hand was revealed. In investigation it was also found that the alleged incident with Rambiswas was happened with intention to humiliate him on account of his caste "Charmakar" (Kumra) covered under the Act. On completion of the investigation, the applicants were charge-sheeted for the offence of sections 307, 341, 294, 324, 323, 506B, 427, 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(x) of the Act. On evaluation of the charge-sheet, the charge of sections 341, 294, 307, 307/34, 323 (two counts), 294, 506B of the Indian Penal Code and section3(1)(x) of the Act was framed against the applicants. They abjured the guilt and thereafter being aggrieved by such order have come to this court with this revision. 2. The applicants counsel after taking me through the copy of the charge-sheet along with the impugned order and framed charges said that even on taking into consideration the face value of the charge-sheet including the nature of the injuries sustained by the victims and the other medical evidence as accepted in its entirety, the charge of section 307 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against any of the applicants. So far the other framed charges are concerned, he has not made any submission for discharging them from such charges. For discharging the applicants from the offence of section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, he categorically stated that the victim Rambiswas and Ramdhani had sustained the simple injuries as stated by the doctor in their MLC reports while in the MLC report of victim Krishna Kumar Mishra as many as 11 injuries have been stated by the doctor. Out of them, injury Nos. 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 are stated to be simple in nature while no opinion regarding injury Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 was given by such doctor. For some of the injuries, victim Krishna Kumar Mishra was referred for X-ray and on carrying-out the same, only fracture of Ulna bone in right hand was revealed. 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 are stated to be simple in nature while no opinion regarding injury Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 was given by such doctor. For some of the injuries, victim Krishna Kumar Mishra was referred for X-ray and on carrying-out the same, only fracture of Ulna bone in right hand was revealed. He also stated that in entire charge-sheet, any of the doctor has not opined that any of the injury sustained by Krishna Kumar Mishra was sufficient to cause his death in the ordinary course of the nature. In such premises, it could not be deemed that the applicants or any of them have committed the offence of section 367 of the Indian Penal Code and pursuant to it the charge of section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, till this extent is also not sustainable and, prayed to discharge the applicants from such charge of section 307 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code by allowing this revision. 3. On the other hand, responding the aforesaid argument, Shri Yogesh Dhande, Dy. GA by justifying the impugned order said that the charges framed by the trial Court are in consonance with the papers of the charge-sheet He fairly stated that although the doctor has not given the clear opinion that any of the injury sustained by Krishna Kumar Mishra was sufficient to cause his death in the ordinary course of the nature but looking to the part of the person of victim Krishna Kumar Mishra on which he sustained the injuries, it should be deemed that he sustained such injuries which by consolidation effect were sufficient to cause his death in the ordinary course of the nature. He also said that in the interrogatory statement of Krishna Kumar, he categorically stated that such assault and beating was carried-out by the applicants with intention to cause his death. In such premises also, the impugned charge of section 307 or 307/34, Indian Penal Code does not require, any interference at this stage and prayed for dismissal of this revision. 4. Having heard the counsel at length, keeping in view their arguments, I have carefully gone through the copy of the charge-sheet along with the impugned order and the framed charges. 5. 4. Having heard the counsel at length, keeping in view their arguments, I have carefully gone through the copy of the charge-sheet along with the impugned order and the framed charges. 5. Before proceeding further,: I would like to reproduce the injuries sustained by the respective victims Shri Krishna Kumar Mishra, Ramdhani and Raniya alias Ramvishwas Charmakar. The same are as under :-- (A) As per MLC report the victim K.K. Mishra sustained the following injuries :-- (1) Reddish swelling indicated lower yu of right upper arm. Right elbow and upper y3 of right forearm. Advised X-ray. (2) Lacerated wound 6 x 1 x 1 cm right Darictal region. (3) Lacerated wound 3 x 1 x 4 cm above injury No. 2. (4) Lacerated wound 2 x 1/2 x 1/2 cm vertex. (5) Reddish swelling left index and middle finger. Advised X-ray. (6) Contusion with abrasion 3 x 2 cm right scapular region. (7) Reddish swelling right shoulder with all deferred margins. Advised X-ray. (8) Abrasion with contusion reddish in color left upper scapular region. (9) Contusion, reddish 2 x 1 cm left knee joint. (10) Contusion reddish 5 x 6 cm right thigh on upper part laterally. (11) Reddish contusion 5 x 4 cm left thigh lateral upper part. Weak pulse 86 p.m. BP 106/70. All injuries are caused by hard and blunt object within 6 hours. Injuries No. 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 are simple. Advised X-ray for other injuries. Patient referred to district hospital. (B) As per MLC report victim Ramdhani sustained following injuries :-- (1) Reddish contusion 5 x 3 cm left scapular region. (2) Reddish abrasion with small abrasion 2 x 1 cm bridge of nose. (3) Complain of pain to left calf tenderness present. All the injuries are caused by hard and blunt object within 6 hours and are simple in nature. (C) As per MLC report, victim Raniya alias Ramvishwas sustained following injuries :-- (1) Reddish abrasion 1 x 1 cm right wrist joint. (2) Reddish abrasion 2 x 1 cm right knee joint. (3) Reddish abrasion right scapular region. (4) Complain of pain right clavicle. All the injuries are caused by hard and blunt object within 6 hours and are simple in nature. Under advise, on carrying-out the X-ray of victim K.K. Mishra, the following report was given by the radiologist :-- (1) Skull AP/Lat : No bony injury seen. (3) Reddish abrasion right scapular region. (4) Complain of pain right clavicle. All the injuries are caused by hard and blunt object within 6 hours and are simple in nature. Under advise, on carrying-out the X-ray of victim K.K. Mishra, the following report was given by the radiologist :-- (1) Skull AP/Lat : No bony injury seen. (2) Right Arm AP/Lat : Fracture upper end right Ulna. No callus seen. (3) Right Forearm AP/Lat :...do... (4) Right Shoulder AP : No bony injury seen. (5) Left hand AP/Lat : No bony injury seen." On perusing the aforesaid MLC report of the victims Ramdhani and Raniya alias Ramvishwas, it is apparent that they sustained injuries simple in nature for which the trial court has not committed any error in framing the charge of section 323 of the Indian Penal Code on two counts against the applicants and, such order, in the available circumstances, does not require any interference under the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. 6. So far injury Nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, and 10 sustained by victim K.K. Mishra are concerned, the same has been stated by the doctor to be simple in nature. In such premises, no any of these injuries could be treated to be sufficient to cause death of such victim in the ordinary course of the nature. So any of such injury does not give the circumstance to frame the charge of section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 7. So far injury Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 are concerned, it is apparent from the aforesaid X-ray report given by the radiologist that victim K.K. Mishra had not sustained any bony injury on his skull, right shoulder and left hand. Only fracture was found on front upper end of right ulna bone in which no callus was found. In view of this X-ray report on examining the case at hand, it is apparent that except the fracture of aforesaid Ulna bone, no any other injury could be treated to be grievous or sufficient to cause death of the person in ordinary course of the nature. Except the fracture of Ulna bone, all other injuries sustained by Krishna Kumar Mishra deserve to be treated to be simple in nature. Except the fracture of Ulna bone, all other injuries sustained by Krishna Kumar Mishra deserve to be treated to be simple in nature. So far injury of aforesaid fracture of Ulna bone is concerned, the same could not be treated to be sufficient to cause death of a person in ordinary course of the nature. It is settled proposition under the medical jurisprudence that due to fracture of Ulna bone the person or any other human being cannot die. So in such premises, the impugned case could be treated to be a case of section 307 or/and 307/34, Indian Penal Code against any of the applicants even for framing the charge. So, such charge framed by the trial Court is hereby set aside. 8. Setting aside the aforesaid charge of section 307 or/and 307/34, Indian Penal Code does not mean that the applicant has not committed any other offence. In the available circumstances, in view of the aforesaid fracture of Ulna bone and the other injury, the applicants have committed the offence of section 325 and/or 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code for which the trial court is directed to frame such charge against the applicants. As the offence of section 323 of the Indian Penal Code relating to simple injury sustained by victim K.K. Mishra is included in section 325 of the Indian Penal Code which is the major section of the punishment of the offence of such category, therefore, no separate charge of section 323, Indian Penal Code with respect of the injuries of victim K.K. Mishra is required to be framed against the applicants. 9. Before parting with the case, I would like to mention here that the accused like the applicants could be convicted for such offence and such injuries which they have actually caused and committed and not for that offence which could have been committed but did not commit by the accused like applicant. Mere on assumptions and presumptions, in the lack of any positive, reliable and admissible circumstances, the accused like the applicants, could not be tried by framing the charge of such offence which they have not actually committed. My aforesaid view is fully fortified by the decision of the High Court of Peshawar decided before independence of India in the matter of Ghulam Sabir Amir Khan vs. Emperor, AIR (29) 1942 Peshawar 21 (2). 10. My aforesaid view is fully fortified by the decision of the High Court of Peshawar decided before independence of India in the matter of Ghulam Sabir Amir Khan vs. Emperor, AIR (29) 1942 Peshawar 21 (2). 10. In the lack of any positive and admissible evidence in the charge-sheet, the argument of the State counsel saying that on recording the interrogatory statements the victim K.K. Mishra stated that the blow of implements were caused by the applicants on him with intention to cause his death, looking to the nature of the injuries as stated by the doctor on the head of the victim, has not appealed me and, therefore such argument of the State counsel is hereby failed. 11. Besides the aforesaid, I have not found any other circumstances to discharge any of the applicants from any other charges framed by the trial Court. 12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, by allowing this revision in part, the charge of section 307 and/or 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code framed against the applicants by the trial Court is hereby set aside and instead it such Court is directed to frame the charge of section 325 and/or 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the applicants with respect of the injuries of victim K.K. Mishra. Till this extent, the impugned order and charge framed are modified while the other findings of the same are hereby affirmed. Revision is allowed in part as indicated above. Revision partly allowed.