Babu Ram vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Mahra, J

Applicant Babu Ram, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 403 of 2024, under Sections 103(1) & 238 of BNS, registered at P.S. Jhabrera, District Haridwar, has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

As per the prosecution story, an FIR was lodged by the complainant alleging that the present applicant attacked the deceased with a sharp-edged weapon Bhala (spear), due to which the deceased sustained injuries and died on the spot.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter; that, the applicant was not present at the spot, and his name has been wrongly mentioned in the FIR.

Learned counsel for the applicant has further drawn the attention of this Court to the fact that as per the recovery memo, a Gandasa paijama and a pair of sleeper were allegedly recovered from the field of the applicant Babu Ram; that, there are major and material contradictions in the prosecution case, inasmuch as the complainant, in his written complaint as well as in his deposition as PW-1, has stated that the accused/applicant repeatedly assaulted the deceased with a spear, whereas the recovery has been shown of a Gandasa.

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the statement recorded as PW-1 merely reiterates the prosecution story, and as per the post-mortem report, all the injuries sustained by the victim are lacerated in nature. On this basis, learned counsel for the applicant argued that no puncture wound has been found; whereas, if the prosecution story is to be believed and the accused had assaulted the victim with a spear, a puncture wound ought to have been present; that, the applicant has no criminal history; that the charge sheet has been filed and there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence; and that the applicant is in judicial custody since 16.10.2024.

Learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application.

In view of the above, but, without expressing any opinion about merits of the case before the Trial Court, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case for bail.

The bail application is thus, allowed and the applicant is directed to 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.