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
10 paragraphs · 382 wordsSushil Kukreja, J
Status report has been filed. As per the report of Medical Board of Dr. Rajendra Prasad Government Medical College, Tanda injuries mentioned in the MLC No. 249/2023, dated 21.06.2023 of complainant Sandeep Kumar are not dangerous to life, as such, offence under Section 307 of IPC has been deleted.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been joining the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer.
The learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions received from SI Ankush Sharma, P.S. Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P., has submitted that the investigation is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the petitioner. He further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Furthermore, there is no evidence on record to suggest that the petitioner will tamper with the prosecution evidence, if released on bail and there is also nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner will abscond and flee from justice, if enlarged on bail.
Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, since the investigation in the case is almost complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the petitioner, coupled with the fact that his custodial interrogation is not required, the petitioner deserves to be released on bail in case F.I.R. No. 88/2023, dated 21.06.2023, under Sections 323, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Nadaun, District Hamirpur, H.P. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the interim order dated 19.08.2023, is made absolute, subject to the following conditions:-
“(i) That the petitioner will appear before the Court and the Investigating Officer whenever required;
(ii) That he will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing any facts to the Court or the police;
(iii) That he will not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor they will try to win over the prosecution witnesses in any manner;
(iv) That he will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.”
Needless to say that the Investigating agency shall be at liberty to move this Court for cancellation of the bail, if any of the aforesaid conditions is violated by the petitioner.