IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the severity of injuries and the direct involvement of the accused are pivotal in bail considerations under IPC provisions.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

Applicants Jaspal and Rohit are in judicial custody in Case Crime No.263 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 302 IPC, Police Station- Bazpur, District- Udham Singh Nagar. They have sought their release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, on 02.06.2023, at around 8:30 PM, the applicants along with co-accused attacked the deceased Ajay with lathi, danda, sharp edged weapon and rod. The deceased was attacked on his head. The deceased sustained grievous injuries. He was still in hospital, when the FIR was lodged.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that all the nine family members of the family have been implicated in the FIR; in the initial injury report, there was only one injury detected on the head, which was so corroborated in the inquest report. In the post mortem report, although, two separate injuries on the head are noted, but it is argued that, in fact, that was one injury, but after operation, there were wounds. Therefore, they were marked separately; PW1, the informant, has already been examined; specific role has not been assigned to any of the applicants and co-accused; the recovery of danda does not connect with the crime. It is a stage of bail. Therefore, it is a case fit for bail.

5. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the informant would submit that the deceased was brutally attacked; bones of his head were, in fact, found missing, as recorded in the post-mortem report; there were multiple injuries on the person of the deceased, as shown in the post-mortem report. Particularly, he would indicate that two stitch wounds were found on the skull region.

6. Learned State Counsel would adopt the argument, as advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the informant. She would also add that at the instance of applicant-Jaspal, a danda was recovered, which, according to him, was used for hitting the deceased on his head, and it had blood stains as well. The recovery memo has been indicated, which records that the applicant-Jaspal has got the danda recovered, saying that with it he had hit the deceased on his head, and it was so corroborated, as per recovery memo, at that spot by one witness Vijay Singh.

7. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial, or in any other proceeding.

8. The initial injury report dated 02.06.2023 records one injury on the head of the deceased. In the inquest report also, there is one injury on the head. In the post mortem report, there are multiple injuries, though, they were not so grievous, except the head injuries. There were two injuries. Was that one injury, which is, after operation, noted as two injuries? It would fall for scrutiny during trial. As per the post mortem report, the cause of the death is hemorrhage and shock, as the result of anti-mortem head injury.

9. As per prosecution, there is a recovery of danda, which is the weapon of the offence, at the instance of the applicant-Jaspal, which had blood on it also. One of the witnesses, as per the recovery memo, Vijay Singh, has stated that with that danda, the applicant-Jaspal hit the deceased on his head.

10. Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that insofar as the applicant-Jaspal is concerned, he is not entitled to bail. So far as the case of applicant-Rohit is concerned, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant-Rohit deserves to be enlarged on bail.

11. The bail application of the applicant Jaspal is rejected.

12. The bail application of the applicant-Rohit is allowed.

13. Let the applicant-Rohit be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.