RAM CHAND GUPTA - (1.) CRL.M.No.3124 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.No.M-1531 of 2012
(2.) THE present petition filed under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. is for cancellation of bail granted to respondent no.2 in case FIR No.11, dated 15.5.2010, under Sections 302, 34 IPC, read with Section 2(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, registered at Police Station Tarsika, District Amritsar. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order dated 22.11.2011, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court granting bail to respondent no.2. Bail was granted to respondent no.2 by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide impugned order after observing as under:- "After hearing learned counsel for the parties and Crl.M.No.M-1531 of 2012(O&M) -2- considering the fact that Titu is shown to be present at the place of occurrence, which took place at about 8.30 p.m., the complainant in the FIR, namely brother of the deceased had stated that he had gone to inform the police by leaving Titu near the dead-body at about 8.30 p.m. Whereas on the other side in his supplementary statement Titu claimed that he overheard the petitioner and other accused talking about the murder of his brother Manohar Lal; it was thereafter that he reached at his shop where the dead body of his brother was lying but still this is not the part of the FIR or the supplementary statement of the complainant, in my opinion, the petitioner deserves concession of bail pending trial. The petitioner is directed to be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Amritsar. The petition stands disposed of."
(3.) IT has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there was misrepresentation and material concealment of facts on the part of respondent no.2. He has contended that his statement was not properly recorded by the police as petitioner is a poor person. He has also stated that he had also filed a complaint and, however, the said fact was not disclosed. He has also placed reliance upon a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Tufail Ahmadm v. The State of Uttar Pradesh 2010(4) RCR (Criminal) 542.;