Lalkara

Lalkara raised by accused could not be brushed aside as insignificant or proverbial in nature but was a deliberate and commanding act contributing to the occurrence

There was specific and active role attributed to accused

Ocular and medical evidence were corroborative

Nature of lalkara raised by accused had dominance over co-accused persons

Case of the accused did not fall within the ambit of further inquiry, nor there was any ground warranting exceptional relief

Bail was refused in circumstances.

Accused was allegedly armed with gun but neither caused any injury to deceased nor made any fire from his weapon during the incident

Question with regard to vicarious liability of the accused was yet to be determined by the Trial Court after proper appreciation of evidence

Accused was no more required for investigation

Accused person had been regularly appearing in the Court without any substantial progress in the trial

Nothing had been recovered from the possession of accused

Out of 40 accused persons, 18 accused persons had already been granted bail by the Trial Court and case of the present accused was on better footing than of those who had been admitted to bail

Ad interim bail already granted to the accused was confirmed, in circumstances.

Accused was father of absconding accused and he had been attributed only proverbial lalkara without any lethal weapon in his possession at the time of occurrence

Effect

Five other persons were charged for causing three bullet entry wounds to deceased

Accused had been shown present in his fields in the site plan at a distance of about 65 paces from other accused

Was difficult to determine whether accused had any intention to participate in committing offence or not

Case of accused required further inquiry into his guilt

Bail, was granted in circumstances.

Presence of accused at scene could be doubted as there was previous enmity between the parties and criminal proceedings were pending adjudication before appropriate Court

Case of prosecution appeared to be doubtful; there was only allegation of Lalkara and it was to be determined as to whether accused was present at the scene or not or he had made any instigation at the time of occurrence of crime

Bail was allowed in circumstances.