HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5003 of 2025 Court No. - 86 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Harish Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. This criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the order dated 18.07.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Jaunpur in Session Trial No. 318 of 2023 (State Vs. Rajeshwar) arising out of Crime No. 08 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 308 IPC, Police Station Sarpataha, District Jaunpur on an application under Section 227 Cr.P.C. for discharge by which the learned trial court has rejected the application on 18.07.2025. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, an F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC. During the course of investigation, Section 308 IPC was added by the Investigating Officer on the basis of forged medical report showing fracture of frontal bone. The doctor in the name of Udai Bhan is not posted in the BHU even though there is report of NCCT head dated 20.01.2020 on the basis of which the medical officer working in Community Health Center, Suiya Kala has prepared supplementary report showing fracture of right side frontal bone, grievous in nature and subdural hemorrhage in right frontal region with air foci. On the basis of this supplementary report the learned trial court has declined the prayer of the revisionist not to frame the charge under Section 308 IPC. He filed an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court which was decided and against the order passed by this Court in an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., he moved Special Leave to Appeal in the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Brijesh Chandra Tripathi, Sunil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Harsh Mishra Rajeshwar Prasad Tiwari And Another .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) dismissed as withdrawn with direction to move discharge application at the stage of framing of charge that's why he has moved the present application with prayer but not allowed by the learned trial court. The order passed by learned trial court is illegal and inappropriate, therefore, request to set aside the order dated 18.07.2025 and allow the revision. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of record, it transpires that the injures were caused to the injured Vedant Tiwari and it was medically examined and when CT scan was done, frontal bone was found to be fractured. C.T. scan was done in Trauma Centre & Superficiality Hospital that is Private Diagnostic Centre but at this stage it cannot be said that the NCCT report has been prepared falsely. The doctor working in C.H.C. Suiya Kala has prepared supplementary report on the basis of NCCT report and found the injury fatal to the life of the injured, since it was fracture of right side of frontal bone with hemorrhage in right frontal region. The doctor of C.H.C. forming opinion about injury has not indicated in his report that NCCT report was suspicious or prepared falsely. On the basis of supplementary report and the gravity of the injury, the Investigating Officer has added section 308 IPC with other Sections. The learned trial court has also considered all these material while passing the order in question. At the stage of framing of charge, the material collected during the course of investigation is subjected the scrutiny only with a view to find out prima facie case but the scrutiny of the material is not expected to be done as during the trial. At this stage, it cannot be said that the NCCT report and supplementary report prepared by the doctor C.H.C. Suiya Kala is false. Even on strong suspicion, charge can be framed. In this way, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order dated 18.07.2025 passed by learned trial court but this revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed. May 6, 2026 Anurag Singh CRLR No. 5003 of 2025 2 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad