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

1994 Supreme(MP) 228

TEJ SHANKAR
Vishnu – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
V.S. Chauhan for applicant; P.D. Agarwal, Panel Lawyer for State; V.K. Saxena for complainant.

JUDGMENT

Heard. This application is filed on behalf of applicant Vishnu. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that according to the prosecution, the applicant was armed with a saria (iron rod). No specific role has been assigned to him except that he was standing. Learned counsel for the non-applicant-State as also for the complainant contend that the applicant along with other co-accused caused injuries. The applicant was armed with saria, Bajarangi attacked with sword on the head, Ramnath attacked with Lathi and co-accused Gopal attacked with Pharsa. I have considered the contentions raised and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of injuries and the post-mortem report, I am of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, the applicant is allowed and it is ordered that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the C.J .M. Gwalior for his appearance on all dates of hearing in the case.

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