JALLEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate. Gone through the F.I.R., the bail rejection order and injury report of the injured persons. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that no specific role with respect to the injuries caused to the injured persons by the weapons carried by the applicant and other co-accused has been provided in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that in the FIR it has been alleged that the accused persons raided the house of the complainant armed with weapons and used the same causing injuries to the injured persons, but during the course of investigating in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It has been stated by the complainant that the incident took place in the fields. This plea has specifically been taken in paragraph-6 of the bail which has not been denied in the counter affidavit filed by the State. Rather it has been stated in the counter affidavit that during the course of investigation since offence under Sections 452, 308 & 326 IPC was not found to have been committed by the accused persons, as such, these sections have been deleted. This fact alone puts a dent in the prosecution story. It has also been argued that the applicant himself belongs to the Scheduled Caste as such the provisions of the SC/ST Act cannot be pressed against him. In view of the above, I am of the view that bail may be granted to the applicant. Let applicant Jalley involved in case crime no. 405 of 2008 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 308, 326, 452, 323 & 504 IPC read with Section 3 (ii) (5) of the SC/ST Act of P.S. Hardi, district Bahraich be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich