Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Manoj Mishra v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4106 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 14983 (31 August 2006)


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).


Hon'ble M. K. Mittal, J.

Appellant Manoj Mishra has prayed for release on bail in criminal appeal no. 4106 of 2006 filed by him against his order of conviction passed in S.T. No. 307 of 2002 by Addl. Sessions Judge/FTC No. 2,Ghazipur. The appellant has been convicted under Section 308, 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment up to five years and fine has also been imposed on him.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Prosecution case is that the appellant on 13.9.2001 at about 8 a.m. belaboured Narmadeshwar  Mishra and his nephew Sudhir Mishra. At that time Barak Mishra and Tiwari Mishra were also with Manoj Mishra, the appellant and they also caused injuries to Narmadeshwar. It has come in evidence that Narmadeshwar Mishra is blind person since birth and at the time of incident he was about 65 years old. At that time Narmadeshwar was going to Mohamdabad in connection with some date in a case. Manoj Mishra the appellant and two others had enmity with the complainant Suresh Mishra and his uncle Narmadeshwar Mishra. They abused Narmadeshwar Mishra and they started belabouring him. The injury report shows that Narmadeshwar Mishra received fracture in his right hand as well as fracture in his frontal parietal bone. There was also swelling in the brain and he was shifted to private nursing home at Varanasi where he was admitted in the Hospital on 13.9.2001 and was discharged on 27.9.2001. C.T. Scan of the Head shows that there was fracture based on middle cranial fosa, left temporal and parietal bones and there was mild generalised brain oedema.

The case of the other two accused has been separated as they are juvenile.

Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that he has been wrongly convicted without there being any legal evidence against him and that the prosecution did not prove the X-ray and the C.T.Scan report and that he was taken to a private Nursing Home and not to a Government Hospital in Varanasi.

Learned A.G.A  has contended that  the accused and two others caused grievous injuries which could have proved fatal as has also been stated by Doctor D.K. Gupta, P.W.-4. The statements of Narmadeshwar Mishra and Sudheer the injured person show that the accused Manoj caused injuries to them and that there is no reason for their false deposition. The appellant has caused grievous injuries to a blind old man which could have proved fatal on account of his previous enmity and in the circumstances is not entitled to be released on bail and his prayer for bail is liable to be refused.

Prayer for bail is hereby refused.

Dated: 31.8.2006



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


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 |

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