Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 3411 (ALL)

Brajveer @ Munnu v. State of U. P.

2015-10-30

MANOJ MISRA

body2015
JUDGMENT Manoj Misra, J. Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Alok Ranjan Mishra for the applicant; Sri Dilip Kumar for the informant; the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 216 of 2015, under Sections 302, 323 I.P.C., police station Daurala, District-Meerut with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 3. According to the prosecution case, while the election process of chairman of Daurala Ganna Samiti was on, the accused, who were three in numbers, named in the FIR including the applicant, fired indiscriminately with an intent to disturb the election process and on account of indiscriminate firing, one person namely, the brother of the informant is said to have died. 4. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that three persons are said to have fired indiscriminately whereas there is single firearm wound of entry and exit found on the body of the deceased and, therefore, the participation of all the three accused in the incident becomes highly doubtful. It has been submitted that the I.O. of the case, upon investigation, has made an observation that the deceased had died from the shot fired by co-accused Rajiv. It has also been submitted that in the circumstances, it appears to be a case of over implication and the applicant has been falsely implicated. 5. Learned AGA as well as counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and has informed the Court that the applicant is a previous convict and has been sentenced for an offence punishable under section 307 I.P.C. by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut vide order dated 8.12.2005 and he is on bail in appeal, against the said conviction, under order of this Court. It has been submitted that in the previous case also, while preparation of voter identity cards was going on in the village, the applicant had exhibited unruly behaviour and had shot one Jaiveer Singh. It has been submitted that instant case is a case of day light incident and was done with an intent to disturb the election process. It has been submitted that since the applicant has not maintained good conduct while on bail, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 6. It has been submitted that instant case is a case of day light incident and was done with an intent to disturb the election process. It has been submitted that since the applicant has not maintained good conduct while on bail, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 6. I have given thoughtful consideration to the submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the applicant is a previous convict and the previous incident also related to the election process, and this is a day light occurrence, where the participation of the applicant has been disclosed, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 7. The bail application of the applicant stands rejected.