The seriousness of the offence under section 307, IPC and the importance of cooperation in the case's disposal influenced the court's decision to grant bail with specific conditions.

S.C.Malte, J.

1. The petitioner and his father are charged for having committed the offence under section 307, Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, both these accused armed with spear charged at Surjit Singh. Petitioner Amrik Singh gave the spear blow on the abdomen. Thereupon alarm was raised and then both the accused fled away with their respective weapons. The injury measured as 3 x 0.7 cm having cleancut margins. The depth of the injury was, however not then proved. The injured was in the hospital from 20.10.95 (date of incident) till 1.11.1995. Thereafter on 8.11.1995 the doctor sent a report that the injuries in the abdomen were dangerous to life. It was vehemently argued that section 307, IPC in such cases would not be attracted. At this stage, I would refrain to make any observation in that respect because the matter is already sub-judice and observation should not in any way influence the approach by the trial Court, but I would say that the trial Court should take into account ingredients to spell section 307, IPC and should also bear in mind the cases in which without even causing a scratch, an offence under section 307, IPC can be spelt out. In this case, the other accused Maluk Singh (the father of the petitioner) is already enlarged on bail. In the set of circumstances, bail is granted to the petitioner on his executing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot, and on further condition that petitioner shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall not try to contact them. The further condition is that he shall render cooperation in the smooth and speedy disposal of the case.