Tej Ram vs State of Haryana

Sat Pal, J.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Mr. Ram Avtar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per allegations made in the FIR, no case is made out under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and at the best it could be a case under section 326 IPC. In support of his contention he has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Tej Ram v. State of Punjab, 1978 Chandigarh Law Reporter 76. He further submits that the petitioner is about 58 years old and he is already in custody for the last over 41/2 months.

Mr. Gill, the learned AAG, Haryana, however, submits that injuries caused by the petitioner are grievous, as has been stated in the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, I direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/ with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak. The petitioner shall not, however, tamper with prosecution evidence during the period he shall remain on bail.