Court No. 20
Crl Misc Case No. 296 (B) of 2010
Amar Nath Singh Applicant
Vs
State of U.P. Opp. Party
Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State
and Sri Vyas Narayan, learned counsel for the complainant.
The accused-applicant Amar Nath Singh is involved in Case Crime
No. 645 of 2009, under Sections 302, 307 I.P.C., from Police Station
Naseerabad, District Rae bareli.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that all the
four accused, namely, Jai Karan, Har Karan, Amar Nath Singh and Ram Jas
who were bearing previous enmity with Brij Bhushan, father of the
complainant Rakesh Singh, had given him iron rod and pipe blow which
caused injuries. Later on, he succumbed to his injuries. From a perusal of
the post-mortem examination report of the deceased, it appears that doctor
had found as many as six external injuries on his person. But all the
injuries, which are lacerated and abraded contusions, were found on non-
vital part of his body. Therefore, it was hardly a case under Section 325/34
I.P.C. not under Section 307 I.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his argument has
placed reliance on the case of Parusuraman alias Velladurai and others Vs
State of Tamil Nadu reported in 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 429,
decided on 11.09.1991 by the Hon’ble Apex Court. As regards the
complainant, he has not sustained any injury. The accused applicant,
therefore, deserves to be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant
opposed the bail application and argued that the complainant too had
sustained injuries. The accused had given iron rod and pipe blow to the
deceased which resulted in his death. The occurrence had taken place
during broad day light. The accused were having previous enmity with Brij
Bhushan, father of the complainant. They had given iron rod and pipe blow
to the deceased in a pre-planned manner. Keeping in view the nature of
offence, the accused applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant
and the learned Additional Government Advocate. Keeping in view the
totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, applicant may be released on bail.
Let applicant Amar Nath Singh be released on bail in aforesaid case
crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
19.01.2010
Renu/-