Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SARDAR MOHAMMAD AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sardar Mohammad And Another v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 17206 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 29 (1 January 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Reserved

Criminal Misc.  Bail Application No. 17206 of 2005

Sardar Mohammad  and another Versus . State of U.P.

Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.

Heard Sri R.B.Singh,  and Sri Ranjeet Asthana leaned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and Mohd. Shabbir and Mohd. Asif Khan learned counsel for the complainant.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that in the present case the alleged occurrence had taken place in the dark hours of night at 10 P.M. on 3.6.2005. The F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant and co-accused Mohd. Khalid and Mohd Hanif. The allegation against the applicants and co-other accused persons is that they caused injuries on the person of the first informant and son of Mohsin Kamal by lathi and danda and they hurled the abuses by extending threat. An F.I.R. under section 504,506 I.P.C. was lodged. According to the medical examination report, Mohsin was examined on 3.6.2005 at  11.30 P.M.. He received only one lacerated wound on the right side of head. The injured was advised for x-ray. The injuries were found to have been caused by hard and blunt object. The medical examination report of Abdul Sadiq  shows that he was medically examined on 3.6.2005 at 11.30 P.M.. He had received two injuries. Injury no. 1 is a lacerated wound on the right side of the head and injury no. 2 was a contusion on the right lower middle  part of the head. The injuries were advised for x-ray  but the x-ray report of Abdul Sadiq shows that there was a fracture on his parietal  bone of skull. Thereafter the case was converted under sections 308 I.P.C.

It is contended that there is a cross version of the alleged incident. The cross report was registered on 3.6.2005 at 11.10 P.M. against Abdul Sadiq, Mohd Yameen and Mohd. Yaqoob. The prosecution has not come with clean hands. The injury received by the applicants have  not been explained. The alleged incident had taken place in a sudden quarrel. It was not pre intended. It is further contended that according to the first information report the injuries were caused by four accused persons by using lathi and danda. It has not been specifically alleged that who caused the grievous injury  on the person of Abdul Sadiq.

It is further contended that during investigation it was found that the co-accused  Hanif, Khalid and Sabir were not present at the alleged place of occurrence and they were falsely implicated in the present case, in such circumstances no reliance can be placed on the prosecution version.

It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant by submitting that injuries were caused on the vital   parts of the body and there was fracture on the parietal bone. During investigation it has come in evidence that only the applicants caused injuries.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicants  are  entitled to be released on bail.

Let the applicants Sardar Mohammad and Dr.Anwar Alam involved in case crime no. 376 of  2005, under sections  308,323,504,506 I.P.C. P.S. Sadar Bazar district Shahjahanpur  be released on bail on their   furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Dt. 27 .09.2005

NA


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.