Prashant Kumar Agarwal, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE accused -petitioners Lokendra and Situ @ Bhagwan Sahay have filed second applications whereas accused -petitioner Darab Singh has filed third application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in respect of FIR No. 425/2012 registered at Police Station Kumher, District Bharatpur for the offences under Sections 148, 149, 323, 341, 336, 307 and 302 IPC. The first application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of each of the accused -petitioners was dismissed by this Court vide a reasoned and common order dated 22.5.2013 alongwith the bail applications filed by other accused. The second application for grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the accused -petitioner Shri Darab Singh was dismissed by this Court vide a reasoned order dated 23.8.2013. All the aforesaid previous bail applications filed on behalf of the accused -petitioners were considered and dismissed by this Court before supplementary charge -sheet was filed by CBI in pursuance of the investigation done by it in compliance of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court. It is to be noted that the FIR was registered for the aforesaid offences at Police Station Kumher, District Bharatpur and after investigation charge -sheet was filed against the present petitioners and some other accused after Coordinate Bench of this High Court permitted the State Police to file charge -sheet in respect of the aforesaid FIR. It is also to be noted that since then the cognizance was taken by the concerned Magistrate against the accused -petitioners and the case was committed to the concerned Sessions Judge for further proceedings. It is also pertinent to note that after investigation, CBI filed supplementary charge -sheet and it was found by it that all the three present accused -petitioners were not involved in the said incident and no case is made out against them. After investigation, the supplementary charge -sheet has been filed by CBI against some other persons including one Shri Deep Chand @ Deepu and Shri Mukesh Meena for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34, 307 and 201 IPC. In these circumstances, the present applications for grant of bail have been filed. As all the present applications arise out of the same FIR, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same were heard together and are being decided by this common order. Copy of the order may be placed on each of the file.
(3.) IN support of the applications, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted as below: (i) Although, the State Police filed charge -sheet against the present petitioners for the offence, apart from others, under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC also and after taking cognizance in the case the same has been committed for trial to the concerned Sessions Judge, but in compliance of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court in a writ petition, further/reinvestigation was undertaken by the CBI and after investigation supplementary charge -sheet has been filed in the case, but it has been clearly found by the CBI that present petitioners were not at all involved in the incident and no case is made out against them and, therefore, in the changed circumstances the petitioners are now entitled to be released on bail. (ii) After investigation, CBI filed charge -sheet against one Shri Mukesh Meena also for the offence under Section 302 read with Sections 34, 307 and 201 IPC and benefit of bail has been accorded to him by the Coordinate Bench vide order dated 12.9.2014 passed in SB Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2721/2014 whereas the case of the present petitioners is now on a better footing by the reason that the CBI has found no case against them after investigation. (iii) Although, the supplementary charge -sheet filed by the CBI cannot legally supersede the charge -sheet already filed by the State Police against the petitioners, but for considering the present bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioners, the evidence collected by the CBI is also required to be considered and if the evidence so collected is considered in a right perspective there are reasonable grounds that false allegations were made against the petitioners in the FIR and the State Police without considering the matter properly filed charge -sheet against them. (iv) Even according to the FIR lodged by the complainant and evidence collected by the State Police, no overact has been attributed to any of the present petitioners and they have been involved in the matter with the aid of Section 149 IPC only. (v) Co -accused Shri Deep Chand @ Deepu has already been granted benefit of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and the case of accused -petitioner Shri Situ @ Bhagwan Sahay is similar to Shri Deep Chand @ Deepu and, therefore, on the ground of parity accused -petitioner Shri Situ @ Bhagwan Sahay is entitled to be enlarged on bail. The accused -petitioner Situ @ Bhagwan Sahay is a young person of the age of 19 years. (vi) According to the FIR lodged by the complainant one Shri Digambar also used fire arm, but both the State Police as well as the CBI has found no involvement of Shri Digambar Singh and the concerned Magistrate has already discharged him. (vii) The petitioners are under custody for more than two years and there is no likelihood of the trial to be conducted in near future more particularly in view of the fact that trial is to be conducted on the basis of charge -sheet filed by the State Police and the supplementary charge -sheet filed by the CBI.;