Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71006 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5951 of 2025 Applicant :- Shamshad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Yadav,Yashpal Yadav Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for O.P. No. 2, Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record. Instant application has been preferred by the applicants challenging an order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Muzaffarnagar, passed in Sessions Trial No. 1556 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 162 of 2023, under Sections 147, 307/149, 323/149, 325/149, 506 IPC, P.S. Civil Lines, District Muzaffarnagar, vide which charges have been framed against the applicants, as well as the entire proceedings of the said case. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that though an application was given on 19.11.2024 from the side of the applicants that some time may be given for preparation of the case to argue the matter on the issue of framing of charges, however, without considering the same, charges have been framed vide order impugned dated 19.11.2024. Addressing the matter on merits, learned counsel further submits that there are 10 injuries which are simple in nature, therefore, from the statements of the doctor and investigating officer, it cannot be said that the offence under Section 307 IPC is made out. At the most, offence under Section 325 IPC along with other Sections can be made out from a perusal of the injuries as well as statements of doctor and investigating officer. On the aforesaid, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 submit that though this is not the stage to entertain the petition as charges have already been framed. In support of their submissions, reliance has been placed on a judgement of this Court in the case of Ravindra Pratap Shahi @ Pappu Shahi vs. State of U.P. and Another, 2021 SCC Online ALL 778 and judgements of Apex Court in the case of Sanghi Brothers (Indore) Pvt. Ltd. v. Sanjay Choudhary, AIR 2009 SC 9; Minakshi Bala v. Sudhir Kumar and others, (1994) 4 SCC 142; and Bhawna Bai Vs.Ghanshyam and others, 2020 (2) SCC 217, wherein the issue of interference by High Court in the matters preferred after framing of charges has been dealt with elaborately. In the facts and circumstances of the case wherein the applicants were exempted from the earlier incident, for which the trial was going on, they have repeated the same incident in the present case causing 10 injuries to the injured, in such special circumstances, the mens rea/ intention while causing injuries is also to be seen, therefore, contention as raised by learned counsel for the applicants can be considered at the stage of trial, wherein charges can be altered. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants and perusal of the record, I do not find any force to entertain the applicants' grievance being sought for by means of present application. The present application stands rejected. Order Date :- 5.5.2025 DS Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad