FIROZ ALIAS SAHIL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that insofar as the petitioner (Firoz alias Sahil) is concerned, he was the pillion rider in the motorcycle and he is not responsible for any grievous injury caused on the injured Mohd Raja.

(2.) The incident, according to the prosecution took place in the following manner: The co-accused Avdesh was driving the motorcycle and the present petitioner was the pillion rider. While driving the motorcycle, the injured Mohd Raja was accidently hit by the motorcycle. Consequent upon this, an altercation took place between Mohd Raja and the petitioner. It so happened that Mohd Raja told the petitioner and co-accused Avdesh that can't they see where to drive. The pillion rider (the present petitioner) caught hold of the collar of Mohd Raja's shirt and gave him some beating with his bare hands. Some others intervened and shortly thereafter, the co-accused (Avdesh) who was driving the motorcycle, all of a sudden and on his own, is alleged to have given Mohd Raja a blow with a pointed weapon which is said to have caused serious injuries on his person. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the role ascribed to the present petitioner, prima facie, would not fall within the offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860.

(3.) The learned counsel for the State opposed the grant of bail. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to agree, prima facie, with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court. The application stands disposed of.