Rajendra Saxena, J. - (1.) HEARD . Perused the case diary. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner Sohan Singh has been falsely implicated; that in the FIR it has been alleged that he has inflicted injury to Surajmal by an axe but at his instance one "KUNTH' was recovered, which cannot be called an axe. His another contention is that there is no allegation that the petitioner had dealt the blows repeatedly.
(2.) SURAJMAL has received two incised wounds on his occipital region. On x -ray examination, injury No. 1 was found to be grievous in nature. As per statement of Surajmal and other witnesses, petitioners Sohan Singh as well as Ram Singh had inflicted injuries by axe to Surajmal and that Sohan Singh had also inflicted grievous hurt on the right hand's index and middle fingers with the result that those were chopped off. The description of the alleged to have been recovered weapon mentioned in the recovery memo of petitioner Sohan Singh, prima facie, does not reveal that it is a different weapon that an axe. At this stage they appear to be similar weapons. Therefore, the alleged difference in the description of weapon is not of much weight. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of this case, there do not exist valid and sufficient ground to allow this petition at this stage.
(3.) I accordingly dismiss this petition. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file fresh bail petition after the challan is filed in this case.;