Sunny Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 188 of 2024, under Section 326, 341, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Sahaspur, District Dehradun. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, on 18.06.2024, at 9:00 in the evening when the injured was accompanying Vicky, on the way he was attacked by the applicant and one Rinku, due to which, he sustained injuries.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that according to the FIR, two persons attacked the injured i.e. the applicant and one Rinku, but it is argued that during investigation, Rinku has not been named as an assailant. It is argued that it doubts the entire prosecution case.

Learned State counsel would submit that the applicant was present at the spot alongwith other persons, but is the applicant, who attacked the injured.

Learned State counsel though admits that as per FIR, the applicant and one Rinku did attack the injured.

In the FIR, two persons have allegedly attacked the informant, but other person Rinku has totally been exonerated during investigation, by the informant, by the injured and by the eyewitness. Why is it so? These and many more questions would find answer during trial.

Having considered the entirety of facts, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.