JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 5.6.2012 passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar whereby the charges have been framed against the present petitioners for the offences under Sections 307, 307/34, 324, 323 IPC. 2. The short facts of the case are that Shrawan Kumar lodged an FIR No. 204/2010 at Police Station Raisinghnagar stating therein that the present petitioners armed with lathis and axes attacked on his brother Ramdaleep while he was sitting out side his house. Ravindra Kumar came there to intervene. He has also been beaten. Both the injured have been admitted in the hospital. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 307, 323, 324/34 IPC. After committal, the present petitioners have been charged as above. Hence this revision petition. 3. The contention of the present petitioners is that the injury suffered by Ramdaleep is simple in nature and nothing is there to suggest that the intention of the petitioners was to kill the injured person. Hence they should be discharged from the offence under Section 307 IPC. Reliance has been place don Mukesh and anr. v. State of Rajasthan (2009(2) Cr.L.R.(Raj.) 1699). 4. Further contention of the petitioners is that cross FIR has also been lodged by the present petitioners in which charges under Sections 324, 341, 324 IPC have been made out against the complainant party and the learned court below has not considered this aspect of the matter. 5. Per contra,the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that only nature of injury is not a relevant consideration to charge the person with the offences. Apart from the injury, manner of the incident, weapon used, the intention of the parties are also relevant and the court below has not rightly looked into the defence of the present petitioners and there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the record. 7. The FIR has been lodged by the complainant Shrawan Kumar in which the manner of the incident has been narrated. Ramdaleeep has stated that petitioner Rajesh Kumar having axe in his hand, has inflicted blow on his head and the injury report also suggests that Ramdaleep has suffered sharp weapon injury on the parietal region. 7. The FIR has been lodged by the complainant Shrawan Kumar in which the manner of the incident has been narrated. Ramdaleeep has stated that petitioner Rajesh Kumar having axe in his hand, has inflicted blow on his head and the injury report also suggests that Ramdaleep has suffered sharp weapon injury on the parietal region. It is true that after medical opinion, it was opined as simple but the intention of the accused persons is amply evident from the manner of the incident that from sharp edged weapon, injury has been inflicted on the head, a vital part of the body and further, sharp edged weapon has also been recovered at the instance of the petitioner Rajesh Kumar. 8. Hence looking at the intention of the parties, manner of the incident and further more the fact that the parties are having inimical relations, the charges have been rightly framed against the present petitioner and no interference in the impugned order is called for. 9. In view of above,this revision petition is hereby dismissed. The stay petition also stands dismissed automatically.Revision dismissed. *******