PAPPU SAROJ Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused record. The applicant is involved in Case Crime No.213 of 2008, under Sections 304, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Hathigawan, District Pratapgarh. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that there are cross cases/versions. From both the sides there are non-cognizable reports as would be apparent from the perusal of the record. From the side of the applicant there are three injured including himself when the police did not take any interest then an application under Section 155 Cr.P.C. was given on which the learned Magistrate was pleased to pass an order directing the police to investigate the matter which is still going on. He is said to be in jail from 01.01.2009. It is claimed in para 14 that there is no criminal history against him. The bail is however, opposed by learned A.G.A. The points pertaining to nature of accusation, danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail, character, behaviour and position of the accused, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and without entering into the merits of the case and particularly having regard to the cross cases/versions and the fact that it cannot be ascertained at this stage as to who was the aggressor, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Pappu Saroj) be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.