KEDAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. J. Mazumdar, counsel appearing on behalf of appellant along with Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate.

(2.) Heard Ms. Laxmi Murmu, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. I.A. No. 7659 of 2019

(3.) Counsel for the appellant submits that this interlocutory application being I.A. No. 7659 of 2019 has been filed for grant of bail and suspension of sentence during the pendency of the present appeal. She submits that this case has already been admitted on 02.07.2019 and is to be tagged with Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 513 of 2019. The counsel while placing the application for bail has referred to the impugned judgment passed by the learned court below and submits that it is apparent from the impugned judgment itself that in the FIR, which was filed by the injured victim, general allegations were levelled against all the accused and it was alleged that the accused persons were armed with 'Tangi' and 'Farsa'. She further submits that there are altogether three injured persons including the appellant (P.W.-4; P.W. 6 and P.W. 7). She further refers to the evidence of Ravi Shankar Yadav (P.W. 6), wherein P.W. 6 had stated that Kedar Yadav (appellant) assaulted him with 'Danda' on his head. So far as P.W. 7 (Ram Chandra Yadav) is concerned, it has been stated by P.W. 7 that he was assaulted with 'Lathi' by the appellant. So far as P.W. 4 (Vijay Kumar Yadav) is concerned, it has been stated in his evidence that he tried to save his father, then he was also assaulted with 'Tangi' by Kedar Yadav (appellant). The counsel submits that there is material contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses, even amongst the witnesses, who were injured in the occurrence. She further refers to Para 6 of the impugned judgment passed by the learned court below to submit that it was the informant party who had entered into the house of the appellant and they were the aggressors and accordingly a criminal case was also lodged being Barhi P.S. Case No. 100 of 2013 and apparently there is case and counter case between the parties arising out of the same incident.