SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Raj) 1685

H.R.PANWAR
MAHAVEER SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.P.S.Choudhary, R.S.Chaudhary, T.C.SHARMA

Judgment

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and public prosecutor for the State assisted by counsel for the complainant. Perused the judgment and order impugned as also record of the trial court.

( 2 ) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant-appellant that it is a case of single gun shot injury and the applicant is in custody since 07. 12. 2004 from the date of judgment and he was also in custody for some time prior to passing of the judgment also. At best, according to learned counsel for the applicant, the offence would be punishable under section 324 IPC and not beyond that.

( 3 ) LEARNED public prosecutor for the State opposed the bail application and contended that PW-8 Rajendra Singh suffered a gun shot injury which on being examined by Doctor pw-9 Dr. Suresh Chandra Swami as also PW-11 Dr. Brijbhushan banga who operated PW-8 as an emergency operation, opined that the injury caused to him was dangerous to life. From the perusal of the statement of PW-11, it appears that the gun shot injury caused by the applicant has damaged the internal more vital parts of the body of the injured, and certain parts were required to be removed by operati



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top