Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Dhruv Narayan @ Guddan Dube vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 June, 2010

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the documents available on the record.
The accused-applicant Dhruv Narayan @ Guddan Dube is involved and detained in Case Crime No. 143 of 2010, under Sections 452, 352, 323, 504, 326, 506, 308, 342 I.P.C., from Police Station Motiganj, District Gonda and he has applied for bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the accused applicant is that on the written report of the complainant Smt. Sunita, wife of Sita Ram, resident of Debey Purwa Mauza Koluha, Police Station Motiganj, District Gonda, the police of Police Station Motiganj registered a case under Sections 323, 352, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. for investigation. The complainant Smt. Sunita and her husband Sita Ram were said to have sustained injuries in the alleged incident. The complainant Smt. Sunita and her husband were medically examined. On the basis of medical examination report, the case was converted under Section 308 I.P.C. On medical examination report of injured Sita Ram, no serious injuries were found on him. He was x-rayed and on x-ray examination, no fracture was found on him. On medical examination of complainant Smt. Sunita, 9 injuries were found on her. One of the injuries i.e. injury no.9 was found bleeding from her vagina. She was referred to Gynecologist for medical examination. Her ultrasound was also done but no grievous injury was found on her. As regards injury no.9, the complainant has alleged nothing in the F.I.R. that she had sustained injury on her private part. Learned counsel further submits that in fact there had been Marpeet from both the sides. Co-accused Ghan-shyam had sustained injuries in the same incident which has not been explained by the complainant. As per version of the F.I.R., it was a case of sudden Marpeet. Therefore, accused applicant deserves to be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application.
Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused applicant and the learned A.G.A.
Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of the offence, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the accused applicant may be released on bail.
Let applicant Dhruv Narayan @ Guddan Dube be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
29.06.2010 Sanjay/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dhruv Narayan @ Guddan Dube vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 June, 2010