Shiv Shanker - (1.) -This is the first bail application moved on behalf of the applicant Jagdish before this Court regarding his involvement in Case Crime No. 120 of 2005, S.T. No. 637 of 2005, under Sections 302, 506 and 120B, I.P.C., Police Station Balder, district Mathura.
(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, in brief, as per the F.I.R. is that Balveer Singh, informant lodged the F.I.R. on 19.7.2005 at 7.15 a.m. against accused Keshav Singh alias Kesho, Bhoori Singh alias Bhoora, Surendra Singh, Jagdish Singh and Ghanshyam wherein it was stated that one arms factory was found in the forest of his village by police. Consequently, co-accused Ghanshyam and his companion had annoyed and there was doubt upon Ranveer Singh and Devendra Singh regarding it. Due to this reason, on 19.7.2005 at about 6.30 a.m. his brother Ranveer Singh alongwith his wife Smt. Guddi Devi and his daughter Km. Asha were going to Nohrey from the house and reached at in front of house of Ghanshyam accused where accused persons Keshav Singh alias Kesho, Bhoori Singh alias Bhoora, Surendra Singh and Jagdish Singh, who were sitting already with rifle and country-made pistols and made firing upon Ranveer Singh. Consequently, he died on the spot due to sustaining firearm injury. Thereafter, they fled away from there after extending threats. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that there was no motive against the applicant.
(3.) IT is further contended that no specific weapon has been assigned to any accused in the F.I.R. During the course of statement before the trial court on 19.7.2005, witnesses specified the weapons as follows : "That the co-accused Keshav was armed with a rifle and rest of the accused persons were armed with tamancha likewise the other prosecution witnesses also changed their stand during their statements before the learned trial court and according to them 8-10 shots were made but there are only 3 firearm wound of entry which clearly demonstrate that they were not present at the time of occurrence." It is further contended that three persons are said to have been going together but none of them received any injury except the deceased which create serious doubt about the presence of the alleged eye witnesses of the occurrence. It is further contended that medical report also falsified the prosecution witnesses as there is material contradiction between the medical evidence and the ocular evidence. Deceased was a man of criminal tendencies. Therefore, there were so many enemies against him and it is quite possible that some of his enemies might have murdered him in the dark night and nobody seen the actual culprits. This fact also found support from the statement of P.W. 3 doctor B. D. Bhaskar, who, in his cross-examination specifically stated that "Yah sahi hai ki postmortem ke anusar martak ki mrityu 1.30 baje ratri dinank 19.7.2005 ko ho sakti hai.";