RAJNI CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sharad Chand Rai, learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State of U.P. and Sri Rajiv Tiwari, holding brief of Smt Annapurna Devi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

(2.) This is an application seeking cancellation of bail granted to respondent no.2 Ravikant by Sessions Judge, Kannauj vide order dated 16.03.2019 passed in Bail Application No. 170 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 93 of 2019, under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Chhibramau, District Kannauj.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that impugned bail order has been passed without considering relevant material and evidence on record. In alleged incident, the respondent No. 2 along with other accused persons has trespassed in to house of applicant and he inflicted repeated knife blows at her husband, who is a 67 years old person. Injured has sustained multiple severe injuries. Photographs of injured clearly demonstrate that injured was attacked with intention to kill him. The injuries sustained by injured are serious in nature but the same were not considered by the court below while passing the impugned bail order. It was stated that 60 stitches were applied to the injuries of injured and that as per CT scan, there was Linear Fracture in Parietal bone of injured but these facts have not been considered by the court below. There was also criminal history against respondent No. 2. It was further submitted that learned court below has not considered relevant facts, evidence and seriousness of injuries of injured and thus, impugned bail order is liable to be set aside.