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
18 paragraphs · 368 wordsThe present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.396/2020
registered at Police Station Sapotara, District Karauli (Raj.) for the offence(s) under Section(s) 143, 323, 341 of I.P.C. and later on for offence under
Sections 323, 341, 325, 307/34 IPC.
After dismissal of the first bail application, charge-sheet has been filed; hence, the second bail application.
Drawing attention of this Court towards the statement of injured Lotanti, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation is of inflicting
injury with axe; but, corresponding injury is by blunt weapon. He submitted that there is no repetition of blow. He submitted that the medical opinion as
to injury being dangerous to life, has been given at a very late stage. He submitted that it is a case of version and cross version in which the petitioner
has also received injury although simple in nature. He submits that the petitioner is in custody since 30.10.2020, charge-sheet has already been filed,
trial of the case will take time, he has no criminal antecedents and prayed for his release on second bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposing the bail application submitted that injured Lotanti has, in her
statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. specifically attributed the injury on her head to the petitioner. With regard to use of axe and
corresponding injury being by blunt weapon, they submitted that it has nowhere come in evidence either in the statement of Lotanti or otherwise that
axe was used from sharp edged side and even otherwise also, it is a matter of trial. They submitted that in view of gravity of injury on head i.e. vital
part of the body of the injured, the petitioner does not deserve indulgence of bail.
Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by learned counsels for the respective parties, the nature and gravity of allegations against the
petitioner, material available in the charge-sheet, especially the statement and injury report of injured Lotanti; but, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
The second bail application is dismissed accordingly.
