Court No. - 20 Case :- BAIL No. - 4573 of 2010 Petitioner :- Nanhe @ Arun Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- Alok Pandey,Shree Chandra Misra Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. as well as perused
the record.
The accused applicant Nanhe @ Arun Shukla, S/o Avdhesh Narain Shukla,
R/o Village Kodari, P.S. Salone, District Raibareli is involved and detained in
case crime no. 1123/2009, under Sections 307 & 316 IPC, from P.S. Salone,
District Raibareli and he has applied for bail.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per statement of
the injured Pushpa, accused Nanhe @ Arun Shukla and Anil Singh had fired
on her and she sustained fire arm injuries while from a perusal of the medical
examination report of Pushpa, it appears that she had sustained three incised
wound and two abrasions. She has not explained in her statement as to how
she has sustained incised wound. The medical examination report is not
consistent with her statement. Therefore, prima facie, the prosecution story
appears to be doubtful. Co-accused Chakkan @ Rajendra Shukla and Rohit
Shukla have already been ordered to be released on bail vide order dated
24.12.2009 and 7.1.2010 passed by another bench of this Court in Cr. Misc.
Case No. 9116 (B) of 2009 and Cr. Misc. Case No. 98 (B) of 2010
respectively. Therefore, the accused applicant also deserves to be released on
bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application and argued that although the
injured has not explained as to how she has sustained incised wound but from
a perusal of her medical examination report, it appears that she had sustained
two fire arm injuries. Two accused are said to have fired on her it might be
possible that she had sustained incised wound on account of fall. The medical
examination report cannot be said to be inconsistent with the oral statement of
the injured. The accused had fired on the vital part of the injured which was
dangerous to her life. Therefore, keeping in view of the nature of offence, the
accused does not deserve to be released on bail.
Considered the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and learned
A.G.A. From a perusal of medical examination report of the injured, it
appears that the injured had sustained incised wound which has not explained
by her in her statement. Keeping in view of the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case without expressing any opinion on the merit of the
case the accused may also be released on bail.
Let the applicant Nanhe @ Arun Shukla be released on bail on his furnishing
a personal bond of two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of
the court concerned.
Order Date :- 22.6.2010
Santosh/-