IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Ist Bail Application No.404 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Abhisek @ Sachin S/o Sri Chandra Pal R/o Village Mahuwakhera Ganj. P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: April 8, 2010 Arising out of F.I.R. No.92 of 2010 Under Sections 452/307/506 of IPC P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Sri S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.S. Bisht, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and also perused the record. In brief, the prosecution case is that the complainant Smt. Meenakshi lodged an FIR at Police Station Kashipur stating that on 27.2.2010 at about 08:50 PM the applicant/accused alongwith co-accused entered into the house of complainant and the applicant/accused fired a shot on the abdomen of her husband and other co-accused also caused injuries to her husband with fire arm. Learned counsel for the applicant/accused has argued that the applicant/accused has falsely been implicated in the said case. Contrary to this, learned Addl. G.A. for the State strongly opposed the bail of the applicant and stated that the applicant/accused is named in the FIR and specific role has been assigned to him. Further, the contents of the FIR get corroboration from the medical report and the supplementary report. Perusal of the contents of the FIR; medical report and supplementary report and other papers available on record, prima facie indicates that on the date of incident i.e. on 27.2.2010 at about 08:50 PM the applicant/accused alongwith other co-accused entered into the house of the complainant and caused injuries to her husband by fire arm. Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances and considering the fact that the injuries were caused by the applicant/accused Abhishek @ Sachin on the abdomen of the injured i.e. on the vital part of the body, it is not a fit case where the applicant should be released on bail. Bail application is rejected accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 08.04.2010 RG