AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through video conferencing today at 11.00 A.M. They have no
complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.
Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State, who opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
The petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, in
connection with Jamua P.S. Case No. 124 of 2015 (G.R. No. 1384 of 2015 /S.T. No. 205 of 2018 ), pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge-
III, Giridih.
Prayer for bail of this petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court on merit. Now, the petitioner has renewed her prayer for bail on the ground of
custody, which is since 14.07. 2017.
From the allegation leveled, I find that there is an allegation that this petitioner had thrown acid and caused injury on the injured Sadam Ansari. The
Doctor, though in his cross-examination, has stated that he did not find any acid injury on the face of Sadam Ansari, i.e. the injured but in examination-
in-chief he has stated about several injuries on the eyes. It is also apparent that since there was acid injury on the eyes, the injured was referred to
higher center.
Thus, taking into consideration the aforesaid fact, I am not inclined to reconsider the prayer for bail of this petitioner. Accordingly, the same is hereby
rejected again.