AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
38 paragraphs · 357 wordsPetitioners are accused 1 to 3 in crime no.2846/2017 of
Chavara police station. They have allegedly committed
offences punishable under Secs 308, 323, 326, 341 and 447 of
IPC read with IPC 34. Apprehending their arrest, they seek bail
under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C .
The prosecution case goes as follows: The accused
persons had grudge against the first informant. Therefore at
about 10.00 a.m on 3.8.2017 the accused persons got into a
private bus in which the first informant was a passenger. The
first accused abused the first informant with filthy words and
beat on the head of the first informant with lever of a jack. The
second accused fisted on the back of the first informant with a
spanner. Accused 3 and 4 fisted on the right cheek and left ear
of the first informant. The victim sustained a fracture on the
nasal bone.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned public prosecutor.
I am shown the case diary by the learned public
prosecutor. I perused the papers in it. I saw in those papers
materials against the petitioners. The wound certificate
suggests fracture of the nasal bone of the first informant.
Serious injuries have been caused to him in the incident. The
investigation is in progress. The petitioners seem to be hiding
somewhere. Their possibility of absconding if enlarged on bail
cannot be ruled out. The possibility of them fleeing from
justice cannot be ignored. For these reasons I do not consider
this to be a fit case to invoke the provisions of Sec.438 of
Cr.P.C
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners wish to surrender before the investigating
officer. The petitioners have all the freedom to do so. In the
event of such surrender the investigating officer after
interrogation shall produce the petitioners before the court
concerned within the time allowed by the Cr.P.C . On such
production the court concerned will act according to law. It is
made clear that the investigating officer is under no obligation
to keep on waiting for the surrender of the petitioners.
The application is dismissed.
