SHAIKH SHOEB Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant apprehending arrest in connection with offence registered u/s 323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code vide Crime No.29/2020 with Police Station, Begumpura, Aurangabad, preferred this application seeking pre-arrest bail u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. Perused the First Information Report and the final injury certificate.

(3.) On due consideration of the submissions advanced in the light of overall facts of the case and the nature of injury sustained by the applicant, I am of the view that the applicant deserves to be extended protection u/s 438 of the Cr.P.C. Although the offence u/s 326 of the IPC is registered against the applicant, there is no evidence to show that in the incident the injured sustained grievous hurt to attract the offence u/s 326 of the IPC. The injury certificate reflects that the injured had sustained contused lacerated wound over the right occipital region caused by hard and rough object, which is shown to be simple injury. Besides the contused lacerated wound, the injured was found to have abrasion over right great toe and blunt trauma over left hand shoulder. All the injuries are shown to be simple in nature. It is nowhere case of the prosecution that the injured was required to be hospitalized and the period of hospitalization was more than 20 days. In that view, the injury sustained by the informant cannot be said to be grievous hurt caused on the part of the applicant so as to attract the offence under Section 326 of the IPC. The injury is alleged to have been inflicted by piece of tile. The incident occurred all of a sudden. The investigation of the case is practically over. The co-accused have been arrested and released on bail.