Ramveer vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Singh, J.—This application has been filed by the applicant Ramveer with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 268 of 2005 u/s 302, P.S. Shamsabad, district Farrukhabad.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Maharaj Singh at P.S. Shamsabad on 8.5.2005 at about 6.30 p.m., in respect of the incident which had occurred on 8.5.2005 at about 1.00 p.m. The F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant alleging therein that the applicant has committed the murder of his brother-in-law (sala) deceased Nanhe Lal by gunshot. According to the post mortem examination report the deceased has received firearm wound of entry.

Heard Sri S. D. Kautilya and Sri Manoj Kumar Srivastava learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that there was no motive or intention for the applicant to commit the alleged offence. The alleged occurrence had taken place on account of some misunderstanding. The statement of Maharaj Singh (P.W. 1), Smt. Laung Shree (P.W. 2) and Smt. Sharmila (P.W. 3) have been recorded in the trial court, but they have not supported the prosecution story, hence they have been declared hostile. Now there remains no evidence on which the applicant may be convicted, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

In reply of the above contention the learned A.G.A. submits that since the trial of the applicant is at the advance stage, it is not proper to appreciate the statements of the witnesses, otherwise it shall prejudice the mind of the trial court, therefore, he may not be released on bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A., I am of the view that at this stage it shall not be proper to appreciate the statements of the witnesses recorded by the trial court, because it may prejudice the mind of the trial court, on the basis of the allegation made in the F.I.R. the applicant caused gunshot injury to the deceased, which is corroborated by the post mortem examination report, the F.I.R. has been promptly lodged and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is not entitled for bail, therefore, the prayer for bail is refused. However, it is directed that the proceedings of the trial shall be expedited on day to day business, without granting unnecessary adjournment.

Accordingly, the bail application is finally disposed of.