SOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that FIR no. 89/2023 dtd. 31/3/2023 was registered at Police Station Haroli, District Una, H.P for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 452, 326, 323, 324 and 307 of IPC against the petitioner. It was alleged that the petitioner tried to kill one Hanshit, son of the informant. The petitioner is suffering from mental illness. He is taking medicines for depression. The petitioner is to be treated at PGIMER, Chandigarh for his ailment and he is required to be released on bail for this purpose. The mental health of the petitioner is likely to deteriorate, in case, he is kept behind the bars. The investigation is complete and the challan has been filed before the Court. Nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner would abide by all the terms and conditions, which may be imposed by the Court; hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.

(2.) The petition is opposed by filing a status report asserting that an intimation was received in the Police Post, Pandoga on 31/3/2023 that an injured boy was brought to the hospital. The police went to the hospital to verify the correctness of the information. The informant-Babita Dhiman made a statement that she had returned to her home on 31/3/2023 at around 8:05 pm and found that her son was lying in an injured condition in the room. She tried to take her son to the hospital but the petitioner attacked her with a Darat. She sustained injuries on her head and body. The petitioner had caused hurt to Hanshit, son of the informant. The Police registered the FIR and conducted the investigation. The Police arrested the petitioner and recovered Darat. As per the medico-legal case summary from PGIMER, Chandigarh, Hanshit had sustained injuries on his head with right petromastoid fractures. The nature of the injury was stated to be grievous. Hanshit used to beat the son of the petitioner and the petitioner attacked him with Darat due to this reason. As per the report of the analysis, DNA taken from the blood found on the shirt of the petitioner matched the DNA profile obtained from the blood sample of Hanshit. The matter is now listed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una on 18/11/2023.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prashant Sen, learned Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent/State.