Ravindra Singh - (1.) -This application has been filed by the applicant Vinod Kumar with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 350 of 2005, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 307, 302, 504 and 506, I.P.C. and Section 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Kalyanpur, district Kanpur Nagar.
(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Vinay Kant Sharma at police station Kalyanpur on 15.6.2006 at 9.15 a.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 15.6.2006 at about 8.00 a.m. THE F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicant and other accused persons alleging therein that the applicant and other co-accused persons wanted to take the possession of plot Nos. 1352 and 1349, its complaint was made to the District Magistrate, Kanpur in pursuance of order passed by the District Magistrate, the Nayab Tahsildar was deputed to hand over the possession to the first informant on 15.6.2006, but in the morning on 15.6.2006 at about 8.00 a.m. the first informant and his brother Harsh Kant Sharma alongwith Arvind Saini, Jai Prakash Yadav and Alok Shukla were present at the shop of building material. At that time Harsh Kant Sharma the brother of the first informant was worshiping inside the shop. THE applicant, co-accused Akhilesh alias Chhotkau alias Chhote Baua, his brother namely Naresh alias Bare Baua, Mukesh alias Tillan, Pramod alias Pammu, Vinod Kumar and Rakesh alias Mahatma armed with country made pistol and co-accused Ganju Bajpai armed with danda came there and hurled the abuses and made assault on the deceased. THE first informant and other persons ran towards the road and firing was made towards them, but fortunately nobody received any injury. THEy saw that the co-accused Naresh alias Bare Baua, Mukesh alias Tillan, Pramod Kumar alias Pammu and applicant Vinod Kumar discharged the shots by their country made pistol at the deceased inside the shop and the co-accused Ganju Bajpai used lathi blow. THE applicant Vinod Kumar was also exhorting to kill the deceased. THEreafter, a crowd gathered and started shouting, seeing the crowd, the co-accused Rakesh alias Mahatma and co-accused Akhilesh alias Chhaotkau alias Chotka alias Baba discharged shots in the air and by extending threat they ran away from the place of the occurrence. Due to this incident, a panic was created and the fear and terror was created. According to the post mortem examination report, the deceased had received five firearm wound of entries and two exit wounds. Heard Sri Satya Prakash Srivastava and Sri Satyendra Pratap Singh learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U. P. and Sri Satish Trivedi senior advocate assisted by Sri Sharique Ahmad learned counsel for the complainant. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that even according to the prosecution version there was dispute between the first informant and other co-accused persons. The applicant was having no dispute with the deceased and his family members. The applicant was having no motive or intention to commit the alleged offence. The presence of the witnesses at the alleged place of occurrence was highly doubtful, because in the said incident only the deceased had received injuries and no other persons has received any injury whereas the equal motive was against the first informant and other witnesses also. The prosecution story is not corroborated by the medical evidence because the deceased has received all the gunshot wounds of entry on one side of the body, whereas the role of firing was attributed to the 6 accused persons including the applicant, it belies whole prosecution story and the deceased has received only 5 firearm wounds of entry and 2 exit wounds. The time of occurrence is also highly doubtful, because the memo of information of death sent from the Regency Hospital Ltd., Kanpur, shows that the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 15.6.2006 at 6.6.17 a.m. and the time of death is mentioned as 15.6.2006, 11.30 a.m. whereas as per prosecution the alleged occurrence had taken place on 15.6.2006 at about 8.00 a.m. which is absolutely false and is not corroborated by the memo of information of death sent by the hospital, but subsequently, the time of admission has been changed in the record of the same hospital and in the admission form it has been mentioned 8.30 a.m. on 15.6.2006 and there was no complaint against the applicant prior the alleged occurrence made by the first informant or any other member of his family. The deceased Harsh Kant was a criminal man and many criminal cases were pending against him. He was murdered by his enemies, but due to dispute over a land the applicant and other accused persons have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is having no criminal antecedents, therefore, he may be released on bail.
(3.) IN reply of the above submissions the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant submit that the alleged occurrence had taken place in a broad day light inside the market. The active role of causing the injuries by the firearm is also assigned to the applicant. There is no inconsistency with the medical evidence because the injuries were caused on the person of the deceased when he was worshiping inside the shop. The deceased was taken in the injured condition to the Regency Hospital. IN the admission form the time of admission is mentioned as 8.30 a.m. on 15.6.2006, but due to some mistake it has been wrongly mentioned in the memo of death information sent to the police station concerned by the hospital. The alleged incident had taken place in the presence of independent witnesses. The gravity of the offence is too much. IN case the applicant is released on bail he shall tamper with the evidence. Considering the facts, circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence, submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant 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.;