KARAN LODHI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA appearing for the State of U.P. and perused the lower court record.

(2.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that according to the statement of witnesses co -accused Babloo discharged the shot causing injury to the deceased and the appellant -Drigpal Lodhi @ Dippa caused injury by using axe blows. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased has sustained two anti mortem injuries, in which injury No. 1 was lacerated wound, which was caused by firearm and injury No. 2 was incised wound, which may be caused by sharp edged weapon like axe. No specific role has been assigned to the appellant -Man Singh. According to the prosecution version, he was armed with Farsa. The co -accused Babloo has been released on bail by another bench of this Court on 02.02.2010.

(3.) CONSIDERING the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. and from the perusal of the record it appears that the co -accused Babloo and the appellant -Drigpal Lodhi @ Dippa caused injury by using country made pistol and axe respectively. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased has sustained two anti mortem injuries, in which injury No. 1 was lacerated wound, which was caused by fire arm and injury No. 2 was incised wound, which may be caused by sharp edged weapon like axe. The role of causing injury is not assigned to the appellant -Man Singh, therefore, the appellant -Man Singh is entitled for bail. The prayer for bail on behalf of appellant -Drigpal Lodhi @ Dippa is refused at this stage.