Full Judgment
506. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. Subsequently section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added to the set of allegations by reason of death of Dhanai Prasad. Learned counsel with reference to the allegations submits that the reason for altercation is a bonafide land dispute between the parties. It is further contended that although the allegation against the petitioner is of making assault by use of farsa on Nathai who subsequently succumbed to the injury, the Post-mortem report attributes the cause of death to assault made by hard and blunt substance with single injury on his head. Learned counsel with reference to the allegation made in the F.I.R. submits that the informant himself has stated that after the assault made by the petitioner and one Shukla Prasad, the members of the group assaulted the deceased by means of iron rods, bhala, gandasa, farsa and sticks. Mr. Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer and submits that there are sufficient materials for 2 rejection of the prayer made by the petitioner as he is the main culprit behind the occurrence. Regard being had to the circumstances and having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner including the post- mortem report, let the petitioner, namely, Prahlad Prasad be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah (West Champaran) in connection with Majhaulia P.S. Case No.180 of 2011. (Jyoti Saran, J.) S.K.Pathak/