MUKESHKUMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed under sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for regular bail in connection with the FIR No. 11216005220075 of 2022 registered with Dahegam Police Station, Gandhinagar for offences punishable under Sec. 302, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and sec. 135 of the Gujarat Police Act.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr. Jagat Patel for the applicant submits that the cause of death is intracranial hemorrhage due to head injury and the eye-witness who was injured namely Mr. Sonu Suresh Rathod has attributed the applicant armed with Iron Angle Pipe and the allegation is that he had given blows on the back of the deceased with the Iron Angle Pipe. Referring to the post-morterm note, Mr. Patel learned advocate submits that none of the injury is shown on the back of the deceased while the injury is some swelling and abrasion on the eyes and frontal area and further all the description of the injuries are at Column 19 under the column of head. Mr. Patel learned advocate for the applicant further submits that it is some verbal altercation between the accused and the deceased along with the eye-witnesses where the present applicant is the manager of the factory and he had asked all the laborers as the manager not to talk in a loud voice and at that time it is alleged that the applicant had held Sonu Rathod with his hair and had slapped him thrice and during that time Subhash and Rajkumar intervened to release them and Mr. Patel submits that because of the said quarrel the accused is alleged to have done him to death while the post-morterm note does not suggest any injury given by the Iron Angle Pipe which was held by the applicant . It was, therefore, prayed that the present application may be allowed and the applicant herein may also be released on regular bail.

(3.) Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned APP submits that both the accused were present at the scene of offence and there are eye-witnesses including Sonu Rathod who had suggested about the injuries inflicted by the applicant with the Iron Angle Pipe and thus further submits that the post-morterm note cannot be a conclusive evidence to suggest that no injury was caused by the applicant . It was, therefore, prayed that no discretion may be exercised in favour of the applicant.