1. According to the First Information Report on 24-6-1986 at 10 p.m. The applicants who were armed with hatchets and Lathis caused injuries to Rabdino son of complainant.
2. An application for anticipatory bail was moved on behalf of the applicants which was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge. They were arrested and subsequently they moved application but the application was also rejected, hence the present application.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A . A.-G . For the State.
4. Bail application was rejected on the ground that the accused had caused hatchet blows on the head and the left forearm of the injured.
5. It is contended by the learned counsel that both the injuries are a result of one blow as the injured wanted to ward of the blow.
6. I have examined the medical certificate. One injury is grievous which is on the head. The other injury is simple. Co-accused had been admitted to bail by the trial Court.
7. The trial has not yet started. The plea advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants is that the complainant wanted to implicate more members of the same family and only one blow had been caused, therefore, at least three persons had been implicated falsely.
8. Without touching the merits of the case it appears that the complainant had given exaggerated version of the incident and the argument advanced by the learned counsel that only one hatchet injury was caused may be plausible and the learned A . A .-G . Has also accepted this contention.
9. The applicants are admitted to bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000 (Rupees fifteen thousand) each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
10. Any observation on merits is not binding on trial Court.