Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 3541 (ALL)

GYANENDRA v. STATE OF U. P.

2009-11-19

NAHEED ARA MOONIS

body2009
JUDGMENT Honble Naheed Ara Moonis, J.—This application has been filed by the applicant Jayveer Singh @ Jasveer Singh with a prayer that they may be released on bail in case crime No. 933 of 2008 under Sections 394, 302, 411, IPC, P.S. Wajeerganj, District Badaun. 2. The facts, in brief, of this case are that FIR has been lodged by Munendra on 25.10.2008 at 2.30 A.M. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 25.10.2008 at 1.15 A.M. The distance of the police station concerned was about half kilometers from the alleged place of occurrence. One Vijendra son of Ram Chand Pali has been named in the FIR as accused, three miscreants were unknown. It is alleged that first informant, his brother deceased Sarvesh Kumar, sister-in-law Smt. Rama Devi, mother Smt. Phoola Devi and sister Km. Suman were sleeping at their house, at about 1.15 A.M. four miscreants entered into the house, they snatched the chain and purse etc. of Smt. Rama Devi, on that, the shouting was made by the deceased and his wife one of the miscreant was caught hold by the deceased then a gun shot injury was caused on the person of the deceased consequently he died on the spot. Smt. Phoola Devi, the mother of the deceased was also beaten by the miscreants, they were identified in the electricity and torch light, when they were going from the village after committing the aforesaid offence, they were prevented by one Kallu who was looking after the tube well, he was also killed by them. 3. Heard Sri Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State of U.P., Sri Ram Babu Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Seven persons namely Smt. Phoola Devi, Umesh, Kallu, Mahendra, Rajveer, Mohan Lal and Radhey Shyam sustained injuries during the course of the incident. The name of the Vijendra Singh was disclosed by the first informant, but other witnesses did not disclose his name as accused. The name of the applicant has not been disclosed by any witness of the fact. After investigation the I.O. came to the conclusion that the named accused Viijendra son of Ram Chandra Pali was falsely implicated. The name of the Vijendra Singh was disclosed by the first informant, but other witnesses did not disclose his name as accused. The name of the applicant has not been disclosed by any witness of the fact. After investigation the I.O. came to the conclusion that the named accused Viijendra son of Ram Chandra Pali was falsely implicated. The only allegation against the applicant is that applicant was apprehended by the police on 11.11.2008, he was identified by the first informant and witness Radhey Shyam. From his possession one country made pistol, three live cartridges, one pair JEWARY silver made and one old golden ring were recovered, the same articles were identified by the first informant and witness Radhey Shyam as stolen property. The applicant has also made the confessional statement before the police, first informant and witness Radhey Shyam. Thereafter the looted purse was also recovered at the pointing out of the applicant from his house. The other witness Phoola Devi and Smt. Rama Devi were also came at the place from where the purse was recovered, who also identified the applicant and one of the miscreant. There is no other evidence against the applicant. The applicant was not put up for identification. 5. In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant that the applicant is not named in the FIR, when he was apprehended by the police he was identified by the witnesses and from his possessions one pair JEWARY, golden ring and purse have been recovered and the applicant is having criminal antecedents, he was involved in 12 cases since 1993 to2008. In case, he is released on bail, he may tamper with evidence. 6. Considering the facts, circumstances of the case, submissions, made by learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and from the perusal of the record it appears that in the present case the applicant is not named in the FIR, the applicant was not put up for identification. It is said that he has made a confessional statement before the police. The recovered looted items were not having the specific marks, there is no direct evidence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled for bail. 7. It is said that he has made a confessional statement before the police. The recovered looted items were not having the specific marks, there is no direct evidence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled for bail. 7. Let the applicant Jayveer Singh @ Jasveer Singh involved in case crime No. 933 of 2008 under Sections 394, 302, 411, I.P.C., P.S. Wajeerganj, District Badaun be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with some conditions : (1) That the applicant shall not temper with the evidence. (2) That applicant shall report to the police station concerned in the first week of each month to show his good conduct and behaviour. 8. In default, the bail granted to the applicant shall be deemed cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith. ————