- (1.) Heard Sri M.P.S Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicants- Ram Babu and Vijay Singh @ Viresh and the learned A.G.A on their prayer for bail in connection with Case Crime No.291/2014, under Sections 147/148/304/308/307/302/506 IPC, P.S. Sasani, Hathras.
(2.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the allegations are general and there is no specific nomination as to the role of the applicant. He further submits that there is a contradiction between the statement of the informant vis-a-vis the FIR inasmuch as the FIR alleged lathi at the hands of applicant no.1? / Ram Babu and a farsa at the hands of applicant no.2 / Vjay Singh @ Viresh, whereas injured Harish Chandra in his statement was also assigning farsa at the hands of applicant no.1 and applicant no. 2 as alleged in the FIR, whereas injured Dharmendra was maintaining the same statement as was made by injured Harish Chandra qua the applicants. He finally submits that applicants do not have any previous criminal history, are languishing in jail since 5.9.2014, trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future, the by released on bail.
(3.) Learned A.G.A has opposed the bail primarily on the ground that injuries sustained by the deceased as are reflected in the autopsy, are as many as 10 in number, out of which injuries nos. 1 & 3 are "cut-lacerated-wounds" which are attributable to the use of farsa at the hands of applicant no. 2 / Vijay Singh @ Viresh, whereas injury nos. 2 & 4 are "lacerated wounds" attributable to applicant no. 1 / Ram Babu. He thus submits that ocular account is compatible with the nature of antemortem injuries both on the deceased as well as on the two injured, i.e., Harish Chandra and Dharmendra. The offence is serious. The period of detention is immaterial and their bail applications are liable to be rejected.;