SURESHWAR THAKUR ,J.

1. In FIR bearing No. 0024 of 13.2.2022, registered at Police Station Machhiwara, District Khanna, offences under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC, are embodied.

2. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that despite, a life endangering head injury becoming inflicted by the accused concerned, upon the victim, yet the investigating officer concerned, is not adding the offence constituted under Section 307 IPC, rather against the accused concerned. The asking for the making of the afore mandamus, upon the investigating officer concerned, would tantamount to this Court impermissibly entering into the domain of investigations, as are being conducted by the investigating officer concerned. Though, the investigating officer alone has the prerogative to conduct the investigations into the FIR (supra), and, to also collect evidence with respect to the afore offences, rather against the accused concerned, and, to also add them in the report prepared and filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., before the learned Magistrate concerned. Moreover, he is also, in the above endeavour rather required to be analyzing, all the collected evidence, including the report of the doctor concerned, hence pronouncing that life endangering injuries became inflicted upon the person of the victim, and, that hence an offence under Section 307 IPC, is made out against the accused, and, that it is required to be added against the accused concerned, in the challan to be filed against them, before the learned Magistrate concerned.

3. Be that as it may, the investigating officer, if he has not taken an opinion with respect to the afore, from the medical practitioner concerned, he subject to the hereafter condition, hence, is directed to take his opinion, and, to thereafter in his report, to be filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., accordingly add the offence under Section 307 IPC.

4. However, the opinion of the doctor, if it is not suggestive of the offence under Section 307 IPC being committed by the accused concerned, thereupon, it may not be legally permissible for the counsel for the petitioner to yet argue that the afore offence is required to be added against the accused concerned, in the report to be filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C., before the learned Magistrate concerned.

5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of, with a direction to the investigating officer concerned to, in case he has not collected the opinion of the medical practitioner concerned, with respect to an offence under Section 307 IPC, being made out against the accused concerned, and, for ensuring that justice to the victim is also done, rather take the opinion of the medical expert concerned, with respect to the head injury concerned. However, if the incident unfolded in the FIR (supra), is aged, thereupon it may be difficult for the investigating officer concerned to get the head injury, if any, suffered by the victim in the assault committed upon his person, by the accused concerned rather examined by the doctor concerned, for enabling the doctor, to make a fresh opinion whether it is life endangering, and/or whether it is related to the time of commission of offence(s) concerned.

6. Disposed of accordingly.