Ravindra Singh - (1.) -This application has been filed by the applicant Saleem alias Kaluwa with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 491 of 2006, under Section 302, I.P.C., P.S. Sadar, district Agra.
(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Shahid Parvez Khan on 20.8.2006 at 7.30 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 20.8.2006 at about 6.00 p.m. THE applicant and two other co-accused persons are named in the F.I.R. It is alleged that on 20.8.2006 at about 6.00 p.m. the first informant heard the shrieks of his wife, then he alongwith his father entered into their house and saw that the applicant and two other co-accused persons were coming out from their house. THEy tried to apprehend them, but they were pushed by the miscreants, they saw inside the house that the deceased had died and blood was came out from her nostrils. According to the post mortem examination report the deceased has received a ligature mark and the cause of death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State of U. P. and Sri K. K. Dwivedi learned counsel for the complainant. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no direct eye-witness account. The only circumstance against the applicant is that he was seen coming out from the house of the deceased. There was no motive or intention for the applicant to commit the alleged offence. The applicant is having no criminal antecedents. He has been falsely implicated due to ill will of the first informant; therefore, he may be released on bail.
(3.) IN reply of the above contention the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant submit that the applicant and two other co-accused persons have committed the murder of the deceased. They were seen inside of the house by the first informant and other witnesses and they ran away from the place of the occurrence. The cause of death is strangulation and there was no reason of false implication. The applicant was having strong motive, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail. Considering the facts, circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant, the gravity of the offence is too much 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.;