Tek Chandra vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ravindra Maithani, J

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No.218 of 2023, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

According to the FIR, on 03.05.2023, at 5:15 PM, the applicant attacked the deceased with a sword due to which he died.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is a false case. He would refer to the CCTV footages to argue that, in fact, on the date of incident, as per prosecution, at 5:15, the applicant had left the house of the deceased. Thereafter, it is argued how could the applicant reached police station at 5:30 and confessed his guilt, as stated by the prosecution. It is argued that how is it possible that at 5:22 the inquest was begin.

Learned State counsel would submit that it is a case of direct evidence. Eyewitnesses have supported the case.

It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion at this stage is not expected of. To the extent of appreciating the controversy, the matter may be examined with the caveat that any observation, made at this stage, shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the case.

As per the prosecution, the incident did not take place at an isolated area. It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, just before the incident, the applicant had visited the house of the deceased. When the applicant left, the deceased proceeded towards his office. But meanwhile, at some distance, he was killed by the applicant. The eyewitnesses have stated about it.

Having considered, this Court is of the view that there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected.

The bail application is rejected.