GUDDU 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.80 of 2009, under Sections 323, 504, 304 I.P.C., Police Station Lalganj, District Rae Bareli. As against the complicity of the applicant it is submitted that according to the F.I.R. itself the applicant was wielding an axe in his hand and other co-accused, Ram Nihar was wielding danda. Though in the F.I.R. it is alleged that the injuries were inflicted by an axe also but in the injury report of Rajwati only two contusions have been found. Similarly in the post mortem report of the deceased three lacerated wounds have been found which cannot be caused by axe which is a sharp edged weapon. He is said to be in jail from 02.02.2009. It is said that there is no criminal history against him and this averment has not been denied by filing any counter affidavit. 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 discussion made hereinabove, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Guddu) 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.