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
4 paragraphs · 190 wordsWe have heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned Counsel for the State.
The prosecution case as well as the deposition of P.W.1, who is the only surviving eye witness (the remaining either not having been produced or having turned hostile in the trial) is that the accused caused gunshot injuries, and the accused were armed with only fire arms. According to the post mortem report only one of the several injuries is a gun shot injury and all other injuries are caused by hard blunt substance.
Accordingly, there is conflict of the medical evidence and the testimony of the sole eye witness account on which the conviction and sentence rests.
Considering the over all facts and circumstances, let the Appellant, who is in jail consequent upon his conviction dated 17.6.2010 and sentence dated 19.6.2010 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (F.T.C.II), Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 222 of 1998 under Sections 302/149/148 I.P.C, be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal upon his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each to the satisfaction of the trial court.