- (1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. This bail application has been filed by the applicant Pheru with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime No. 249 of 2007 under sections 147,148,149,452, 302,120-B IPC, P. S. Ramala, district Baghpat.
(2.) THE facts in brief of this case are that the FIR of this case has been lodged by Rajpal Singh on 21. 9. 2007 at 2. 45 P. M. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 21. 9. 2007 at about 2. 00 P. M. THE applicant and ten other co-accused are named in the F. I. R. It is alleged that on 21. 9. 2007 at about 2. 00 P. M. the applicant and other co-accused persons entered into the house of the deceased and discharged the shots indiscriminately upon the deceased Sahab Singh, thereafter the deceased ran and entered into the house of Mahendra where the accused persons discharged the shots consequently the deceased sustained injury and died instantaneously. According to the post mortem examination report the deceased had sustained 20 ante mortem injuries in which gun shot wounds of entry were 12 in number and the rest of the injuries were exit wounds. THE applicant applied for bail before learned Sessions Judge, Baghpat who rejected the same on 18. 1. 2008, being aggrieved from the order dated 18. 1. 2008 the applicant filed the present bail applicant. Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh and Sri P. S. Pundeer, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. for the State of U. P. and Sri Mohd. Farooque, learned Counsel for the complainant. It is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent, aged about 67 years. He has not committed the alleged offence. The applicant has been falsely implicated only because prior the alleged incident the brother-in-law of the applicant, his two sons and to other persons were murdered, in that case the applicant was doing the pairavy. It is further contended that second part of the incident has taken place in side the house of Mahendra. The statement of Mahendra has recorded, according to his statement only four or five persons entered into his house and caused injuries on the persons of the deceased. According to his statement co-accused Neetu, Mukesh, Ramveer and Vinod caused injury on the person of the deceased. He did not disclose the name of the applicant which shows that the name of the applicant is false. The applicant is having no criminal antecedent. Therefore, he may be released on bail.
(3.) IN reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A. G. A. and learned Counsel for the complainant that it is a broad day light incident. The applicant and other co-accused persons in a pre planned manner made an attack in the house of the deceased and caused injuries on his person. Thereafter he went to the house of Mahendra to save his life but injuries were caused on his person at his house also. The deceased has sustained 12 ante mortem gun shot wounds of entry. The bail application of the co-accused Sardar Singh has been rejected by the another bench of this Court on 5. 12. 2007 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27650 of 2007. Therefore, he may not be released on bail. Considering the facts, circumstance of the case, the gravity of the offence and effective role of the applicant discharging the shots along with other co-accused persons causing the injuries on the person of the deceased and submissions made by learned Counsel for the applicant, 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 at this stage. The prayer for bail is refused. Accordingly this application is rejected. Application Rejected. .;