STATE Vs. FAYAZ AHMAD MIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for grant of bail to the petitioner who was initially arrested for an offence u/s 279/338 R. P. C. for having injured one Ghulam Mohammad Dar While riding a cycle. This offence was later on converted into 304 - A R. P. C when the injured died in the Hospital the offence was again converted to 302. RPC on the basis of recording of a few witnesses twenty eight days after occurrence. The offence having been changed to 302 R. P. C. the petitioner was re -arrested by police Station Bijbihara, who had been already released on bail by C. J. M. Anantnag. He has moved this application seeking enlargement on bail simply on the ground that the convertion of the offence from 304 -A to 302 R. P. C. is an after -thought when this application came up for judgments be fore me on 12 -5 -1983, I had asked the Advocate General to produce the case diaries before me on 16 -5 -1983. Since 1 was sitting in a Division Bench this case could not be taken up o n 16 -5 -1983 and has been taken up today.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Chief Govt. Advocate. The case diaries too have been produced before me. I have gone through them also.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the case diaries and the perusal of the statements of the witnesses examined during the investigation of the case. I do not find that there was any motive on the part of the petitioner to give beating to the deceased. This was very important for in the absence of a motives, it would be difficult to believe that the deceased was beaten to death by the petitioner. What ultimately transpires during the course of investigation is a different matter. Suffice it to say that presently there are good grounds for enlarging the petitioner on bail, It is accordingly ordered that the petitioner shall be released from custody on his furnishing surety in the amount of Rs. 10,000/ - with his personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anantnag, I may again make it clear that my aforesaid observations will not be taken into consideration by the Court, which eventually was the petitioner. The application is finally disposed of.