BISHAMBAR DAYAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Rajul Bhargava, learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned Counsel for the complainant and learned AGA.

(2.) THESE are two bail applications (CMBA No. 11951 of 2000) first on behalf of Bishambar Dayal applicant and (CM II B.A. No. 11590 of 2000) second on behalf of Satish applicant. First bail application on behalf of Satish was rejected by order dated 20 -7 -2000.

(3.) THE incident is said to have oc ­curred around 2.45 p.m. which is admitted to both the parties. The report by the com ­plainant side was lodged at 10.30 p.m. on 17 -5 -2000 whereas on the side of the ac ­cused report was lodged on 18 -6 -2000 at 1.30 p.m. The explanation is that first the victims were attended and given medical aid etc. The place of occurrence and the time of incident by both the sides is not disputed. Since some of the witnesses have admitted that the victims of the side of the applicant have sustained injuries in the same incident. Question as to who was aggressor can be decided at trial, I am of the view that the applicants maybe released on bail.