Mule vs State of U.P.

S.K. Agarwal, J.—State Counsel has filed a counter affidavit today. It shall be taken on record.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and Sri Satish Trivedi, learned counsel for the complainant.

It is contended that the F.I.R. shows that 15 assailants, who participated in the incident against Sajid, had used Lathis, Dandas and Tabals. It is not necessary that the weapons be specified in the F.I.R. but even in 161 Cr. P.C. statements no weapons were specified to individual accused. All the injuries sustained by the victim are of blunt object. As many as 16 injuries were caused to him, some of them are multiple in nature. The offence, undoubtedly, has been committed with all possible brutality, but despite all, the fact yet remains that in 161 Cr. P.C. statement the informant has absolved three assailants, viz. Mangal Sen, Vishambhar and Firera. The pretext for their absolving is that they were nominated at the instance of the villagers.

Learned Counsel for the applicant strenuously contends that what will be the guarantee with regard to others in their nomination in the F.I.R. by the informant if he is gullible to pressures or advises. Absence of any injury of sharpedged heavy cutting weapon further creates serious dent in the prosecution story with regard to the participation of the members amongst the assailants armed with sharpedged weapons.

In these circumstances, without adverting any further to the merits of the case, I find that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Let this applicant, involved in case Crime No. 173 of 2000 under Sections 302/149/148/147/506 I.P.C., P.S. Mundali, District Meerut, be, therefore, enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Meerut.