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
7 paragraphs · 208 wordsPrafulla C. Pant, J.—Shri Amish Tiwari, Advocate, present for the applicant.
Shri S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A., present for the State.
Applicant-Purushottam, who is in jail in connection with crime No. 40 of 2011, relating to offences punishable u/s 452, 307, 506 IPC, P.S. Dalanwala, District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the injury report shows that there was only 5% burn injury. It is further pointed out that only beard and mustache were found singed. It is pointed out that in the FIR the four persons (including applicant) are named, and it is not specified as to who attempted to set the complainant on fire. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has no criminal history.
Having considered submissions of learned Counsel for the parties, and after going through the papers on record, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail.
The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Purushottam be released on bail on executing personal bond, and furnishing two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.