HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12711 of 2025 Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent, and perused the material available on record. 2. The present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 23.07.2025 passed by the court of learned Sessions Judge, Agra in Sessions Trial No.1148 of 2025 titled State v. Harcharan @ Raghuvar and others, arising out of Case Crime No.14 of 2024, under sections 307, 323 IPC, Police Station Kheda Rathore, District Agra, whereby the discharge application preferred by the petitioners have been rejected. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that an FIR bearing Case Crime No.14 of 2024, under Sections 324 and 323 of IPC, was lodged at Police Station Khera Rathore, District Agra, on 28.03.2024. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner. 4. Aggrieved by filing of the charge sheet, the petitioners moved a discharge application before the court of the District & Sessions Judge, Agra, which was dismissed by the impugned order dated 23.07.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to ulterior motive; there was a delay of three days in lodging the FIR against the petitioner; the medical examination of the alleged injured was conducted in a private hospital and the injury as alleged was not corroborated with the medical report; the petitioners have been falsely implicated on the basis of statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; and the investigation was neither impartial nor Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Garvit Ramchandran, Manoj Kumar Singh, Ram Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Harcharan @ Raghuvar And 2 Others .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) fair, as the Investigating Officer was biased in favour of the complainant. 6. Upon hearing the submissions advanced and on perusal of the record, it appears that the injuries sustained by the complainant have been duly corroborated, including those detailed in supplementary medical report. The question of delay in lodging the FIR, credibility of the medical report, and the alleged bias of the Investigating Officer are matters which require appreciation of evidence and can be raised during the course of trial. At this stage, the said contentions are essentially in the nature of a defence, which cannot be a ground for discharge. 7. This Court does not find any illegality, infirmity, or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 8. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. October 17, 2025 Anil K. Sharma A227 No. 12711 of 2025 2 (Vinod Diwakar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad