- (1.) S. K. Agarwal, J. This bail application was received back from the apex Court for reconsideration on the grounds indicated in its order by the apex Court. The bail to this accused was granted by me against which the complainant had preferred an appeal before the highest Court of the land.
(2.) AFTER hearing the parties the case was remanded back to this Court, as stated above, for a fresh consideration on the grounds to be considered by this Court, as per direction of the apex Court. The grounds are " (1) the fact that the accused is named in the FIR; (2) the fact that accused had other accusations to his credit; and (3) the fact that the co-accused was denied bail. " The apex Court felt that these facts have not received consideration at the hands of the High Court. These are the three factors, which this Court is required to give its consideration before affirming or disowning the previous order passed by it in favour of the accused-applicant on 30-5-2004. The facts as available from the FIR are that the present accused was named in the FIR alongwith five other known accused. It was not the end of the matter. 3-4 unknown accused were also alleged as present alongwith these named accused persons in the incident. All these known and unknown accused were armed dangerously with sophisticated fire weapons. While preparing the G. D. Entry, participation of these unknown accused was abandoned. It is clearly available from G. D. No. 12 by which the case was registered despite averment to it being made in the FIR. In the FIR there was an allegation that the accused persons had also taken away the licenced pistol of deceased Mahak Singh, but surprisingly in the G. D. entry no offence for this theft was registered. There was strong enmity between the parties. There is allegation in the FIR that the accused persons managed the recall of the security guard of the deceased persons. All the accused persons, those named including the applicant and 3-4 unnamed were armed with Tamanchae (country made pistols), pistols and stain- gun. All were alleged to have opened fire upon Mahak Singh and Mohkam Singh with an intention to kill them. Ved Singh, who at some later stage, before the occurrence, joined the deceased at the Chabutara also suffered injury in the said shoot out. Another person, Mahendra's son also suffered fire-arm injuries.
(3.) AN overall picture emerging from the two post-mortem examination reports is revelation of the fact that there were as many as eight entry wounds in the case of Mahak Singh. Out of them three wounds, viz. injuries No. 1, 3 and 7, have their exits also. Few injuries were on non-vital parts, viz. on the thighs. The shots seem to have been fired from close range and they apparently were of a rifle or a revolver. In pistols, generally factory made or country made, cartridges are used. Some of the injuries were of the dimension of 1-1/2 cm. x 1- 1/2 cm. or 1-1/4 cm. 1-1/4 cm. From some injuries bullets were recovered. One or two injuries were in the dimension of 3/4 cm. x 3/4 cm. Coming to the case of Mohkam Singh, I find that there were only two entry wounds, viz. injuries No. 1-A and 2-A. Injuries No. 1-B and 2-B are their exit wounds. The dimension was 3/4 cm. x 3/4 cm. There was no blackening or tattooing. The injury on the back outer side upper third of right arm was oval shaped, meaning thereby that it apparently was a bullet injury. Injury No. 2-A was an entry wound in the size of 1-1/4 cm x 1-1/4 cm. x cavity deep on the right side back, just below the lower end of right scapula. Thus both the injuries suffered by Mohkam Singh were on his back.;