- (1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. Heard Sri I. P. Singh and Sri Sunil Singh learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. for the State and Sri Rajul Bhargava, learned Counsel for the complainant.
(2.) THIS application has been filed by the applicant Uttam with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 715 of 2007 under sections 302 I. P. C. P. S. Sikanderabad district Bulandshahar. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that in the present case F. I. R. has been lodged by Rajendra Singh S. S. I, at P. S. Sikanderabad in which the applicant is not named as accused, it is alleged that three unknown persons caused firearm injury on the person of the deceased on 30. 8. 2007 at about 6. 15 p. m. , the deceased in an injured condition was taken to the Government Hospital Sikenderabad from where he was referred to Ghaziabad but subsequently, the deceased succumbed to his injuries. It is clearly mentioned in the F. I. R. that the deceased was unconscious but he disclosed that three unknown persons caused injuries on his persons but during investigation the name of the applicant has been disclosed by Niraj Kumar on 30. 8. 2007, that injury on the person of the deceased was caused by the applicant and the co-accused Sonu Pawar and Surendra by their countrymade pistol whereas according to the statement of the first informant Rajendra Singh, witness Niraj was also present at the alleged place of occurrence but it is surprising that he has not disclosed the name of the applicant and other co-accused persons to S. S. I. Rajendra Singh. The naming of the applicant is after thought. In reply to the above contention it is submitted by the learned A. G. A. and the learned Counsel for the complainant that there was no opportunity of disclosing the name to the first informant because the deceased in a serious condition was taken to the hospital. The statement of the witnesses Niraj Kumar was recorded on the same day immediately after lodging the F. I. R. and the deceased was taken to the hospital where it is mentioned that the deceased was brought by Subody Kumar, who is a family member of the deceased. The allegation against the applicant and other co-accused persons is that they have discharged the shots upon the deceased, which has been corroborated by the post-mortem examination report because according to the post-mortem examination report the deceased has sustained three firearm wounds injuries. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he shall tamper with the evidence.
(3.) CONSIDERING the fact, circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. and the learned Counsel for the complainant, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the prayer for bail is refused. Accordingly, this application is rejected. .;