- (1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. The applicant Constable Ram Sakal Yadav and Constable Shiv Mohan Singh have moved the Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2714 of 2008 and Constable Sati Ram Chaurasia has moved the Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6375 of 2008 with a prayer that they may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 124-Aof 1996 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 193 I. P. C. , P. S. Ali Nagar, District Chandauli. Both the applications are arisen out of the same case crime number, therefore, both the applications are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.) HEARD Sri Raghubir Singh and Sri S. R. Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State of U. P. From the perusal of the record it appears that in the present case the FIR has been lodged by Ashok Kumar on 3. 10. 1996 at about 06. 05 p. m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 20. 9. 1996 at about 11. 30-12. 00 p. m. in front of police station Alinagar. On the day of the alleged incident the applicants were posted at police station Alinagar, District Chandauli. In respect of the same incident one FIR was lodged by the Station Officer, Surendra Kumar Yadav on 20. 9. 1996 at 11. 50 p. m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 20. 9. 1996 at 10. 45 p. m. In case Crime No. 124 of 1996 under section 307 I. P. C, case Crime No. 125 of 1996 under section 25 of N. D. P. S. Act, case Crime No. 126 of 1996 under section 25/27 Arms Act, Case Crime No. Nil of 1996 under section 41/411 I. P. C. in which the police version has been given that P. S. Alinagar has received a wireless message that some unknown miscreants are going in an ambulance, Maruti Van towards Varanasi. The attempts were made to check the vehicle but the vehicle was accelerated, on that information the applicants and other police officials under the leadership of S. O. Surendra Kumar Yadav came on the G. T. Road side at about 11. 05 p. m. , the ambulance car came there, a signal for stopping the same was given but the vehicle was not stopped and it's speed was accelerated then firing was done at the police party. The vehicle was chased by the police personnel by the S. O. thereafter three shots discharged by AK-47 rifle, consequently the vehicle of the miscreants became uncontrolled and it was turned down, thereafter, the miscreants boarding at a ambulance ran on their feet, they were chased and firing was done in self defence by the S. O. Surendra Kumar Yadav and constable Swami Nath consequently, two miscreants lost their lives and one 9 mm pistol lying near the dead body of one miscreant and one 12 bore pistol along with cartridges was lying near the second miscreant, in this incident 12 miscreants successfully escaped from the place of occurrence. The police has made the relevant entries in the G. D. Also to show that a police encounter has taken place with the unknown miscreants in which two persons has been killed but the real story was otherwise as given by Ashok Kumar by way of lodging the present FIR on 3. 10. 1996 in which it has been mentioned that one ambulance was taken from Delhi on 16. 9. 1996 in which the dead body was taken to the Bihar, after leaving the dead body at its destination the deceased and other persons were returning, when they reached near Alinagar police station at about 11. 30-12 pm on 12. 9. 1996 the ambulance was stopped by the S. O. at this stage the firing was done by the police party in which deceased Jor Singh and helper of the ambulance Sanjay died instantaneously, anyhow it's driver Shiv Raj Singh saved his life. It's Magisterial enquiry was done and the statement of the witnesses were recorded which shows that the applicant have actively participated in the commission of the alleged offence and in defence the false FIR showing the police encounter has been lodged and relevant entries were made in the G. D.
(3.) ACCORDING to the post-mortem examination report both the deceased has sustained gun shot injuries in which one of the injured was having blackening around the fire arm wound which shows that injury was caused from a closed range which belies the story of the police encounter at this stage. Therefore, it is not proper to appreciate the argument made by learned Counsel for the applicant that according to the police version the applicants were in the second party which was not discharging the shots upon the miscreants. The shots have been discharged by other persons but learned Counsel for the applicant has failed to show the criminal history of the deceased persons in such circumstances the applicants are not entitled for bail, therefore, the prayer for bail is refused. Accordingly, both the applications are rejected. Applications Rejected. .;