SUMER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that the complainant party was the aggressor as has come on record on the basis of the statement recorded of independent witnesses and that the aid of Sec. 149 have wrongly been taken. Om Prakash, Sheesh Ram and Phool Chand were similarly situated were granted bail in respect of the same incident and in respect of Rohtash it is submitted that no over act has been assigned and therefore these persons should be released on bail, as the action, if any, was taken in self-defence as Shri Indraj who is on the side of the accused-party was killed at the first instance and therefore the subsequent action was only by way of self-defence.

(2.) MR. Praveen Balwada learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that it is a double murder case and the name of these three persons have been placed in the FIR and they were present at the spot. Even going to the Tehsil office with axe and lathi shows their intention and that the provisions of Sec. 149 have rightly been invoked. Recovery of Axe and lathi is made from these persons. It is also submitted that Indraj who has expired was not a person of the accused party but was inflicted the jnjury by Dharmpal with jelly. The various other submissions have also been made on merit.