JUDGMENT : Vivek Singh Thakur, J. Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.P.C.) seeking bail in case FIR No. 239 of 2021, dated 26.8.2021, registered in Police Station Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 302, 307, 323, 325, 326, 201, 147, 148, 149, 440, 354, 354-B, 109 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’), Section 25 of Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(r), (s), (w) & 3 (2)(va) of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as SC&ST Act). 2. Status Report stands filed. Record was also made available along with CCTV Footage of Café Waters Edge, being relied upon by the prosecution for identification of accused and other persons. 3. Prosecution case is that on 25.8.2021 at about 7:30 P.M. an information was received in Police Station, Kullu that at near Saeubag at Chhururu, some mishap had occurred. This information was transmitted by Police Station staff to QRT team and to SI Kushal Kumar, the then SHO, who was on patrolling. SI Kushal Kumar, out of his Patrolling Party, deputed ASI Vij Ram and Constable Om Parkash to reach Regional Hospital, Kullu to handle the situation on arrival of injured and alongwith remaining team of Patrolling Party he rushed to spot. On reaching near Café Water Edge (hereinafter referred as Café) at Chhururu, he met Constables of QRT Team of Kullu Police who were controlling the traffic on the spot, managing preservation of the spot and were waiting for Ambulance to shift injured persons from spot. Son of victim Yuma Devi and other onlookers were also present on the spot. Paras Ram was lying in katcha portion of road on side of road. He was bleeding badly and at some distance from him, in the middle of the road, his broken vehicle was there. On left front seat thereof injured Yuma Devi was crying due to pains. SI Kushal Kumar instead of waiting for Ambulance directed QRT Team and son of victim to shift injured to the Hospital in his Police vehicle. Thereafter on reaching the Hospital, treatment of injured was started in emergency. On left front seat thereof injured Yuma Devi was crying due to pains. SI Kushal Kumar instead of waiting for Ambulance directed QRT Team and son of victim to shift injured to the Hospital in his Police vehicle. Thereafter on reaching the Hospital, treatment of injured was started in emergency. During treatment, statement of Yuma Devi was recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C. by ASI Vij Ram, on the basis of which FIR was registered under Sections 307, 320, 147, 148, 149 IPC, Section 25 of Arms Act and Section 3 of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 4. Keeping in view serious condition of victims during night, they were referred to Medical College and Hospital, Nerchowk, Mandi. As provisions of SC&ST Act were attracted, therefore, in compliance of communication dated 26.8.2021 issued by Superintendent of Police, Kullu, investigation was transferred to Additional Superintendent of Police, Kullu. 5. As per medical record, following major injuries were found on the person of victim Yuma Devi and Paras Ram. (a) Yuma Devi. “1. Open wound left leg-blunt injury. 2. Lacerated wound left leg-blunt injury. 3. Swelling both arms-blunt injury. 4. Swelling distal phalange both arms-blunt injury. 5. Open wound left thumb blunt injury. 6. Fracture both bone forearm-grievous nature. 7. Fracture left leg-grievous nature.” (b) Paras Ram: “(1) Lacerated Wound (3x2 CM) over frontal region. (2) Bruise (variable size) over right and left shoulder 10x3, 2x1 cm, 5x3 cm. (3) Bruise (10x3 cm) over left shoulder. (4) Open wound over right forearm (3x1 cm, 3x1 cm, 4x2 cm). (5) Open wound over left forearm. (6) Bruise (6x4 cm) over left thigh 9 cm from ASIS. (7) Bruise (5x3 cm over Right thigh 10 cm from ASIS. (8) Open wound (3x1, 4x2, 3x1.5 cm, 4x1) over left leg. (9) Open wound (4x1) cm over right leg. (10) Lacerated wound (6x3 cm) over left arm. (11) Bruise (5x3 cm) over left knee. (12) Bruise (variable size). (13) fracture hank both bone forearm & leg both side.” 6. (7) Bruise (5x3 cm over Right thigh 10 cm from ASIS. (8) Open wound (3x1, 4x2, 3x1.5 cm, 4x1) over left leg. (9) Open wound (4x1) cm over right leg. (10) Lacerated wound (6x3 cm) over left arm. (11) Bruise (5x3 cm) over left knee. (12) Bruise (variable size). (13) fracture hank both bone forearm & leg both side.” 6. During investigation statement of Yuma Devi was also recorded on 2.9.2021 in Medical College and Hospital, Nerchowk, wherein she had given detailed statement about dispute and incident with explanation that at the time of recording of previous statement immediately after the attack when she was in Kullu Hospital, she was grievously injured and was under shock and influence of various kinds of drugs/injections administered to her by the doctors, and was in semi-conscious state, and in between her statement was being recorded by the Police and in such state of mind and body she could not narrate the facts of incident properly and completely. 7. Statement of victim has also been recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kullu on 9.11.2021. As per prosecution case, as also narrated in the statement of victim Yuma Devi depute had arisen between complainant party and assailants party with respect to sale and purchase of land and a threat was extended by Khimi Ram alias Kewlu to the injured party, whereupon on 23.8.2021 injured party went to Police Station, Kullu, but their FIR was not registered and they were called on next morning and on 24.8.2021, when they went to Police Station, Kullu, Khimi Ram alias Kewlu was also found summoned there, but he did not come to I.O., but kept on sitting in his vehicle behind the Police Station and when by noon Yuma Devi felt hungry, she alongwith her husband went outside the Police Station to have some eatables. When they reached near District Court Kullu, Khimi Ram came behind them in his vehicle and stopped his Car near the couple and took out a danda from Dickey of his Car, whereas his driver Vijay took out a rod and both of them tried to beat her husband and at that time Sidhu was also accompanying the assailants. Sidhu held her husband, whereas Khimi Ram went on beating him. Sidhu held her husband, whereas Khimi Ram went on beating him. The moment Vijay tried to give blow to her husband, Yuma Devi rushed and snatched the rod from him and asked to leave her husband, with warning that otherwise she will also hit. By that time, two Policemen also came, one of them caught her husband alongwith Sidhu and Khimi Ram kept on beating her husband. Yuma Devi hit the vehicle of Khimi Ram with rod and cried loudly asking to leave her husband with threat that otherwise she would damage the vehicle. In the meanwhile, Vijay came and snatched the rod from her and slapped her and thereafter Khimi Ram, Policemen and Vijay beat her husband. With fist blow of Khimi Ram, her front tooth was dislocated. Thereafter Police came and scuffle was ended and they went home. 8. On 25.8.2021, they were again called in the Police Station at 10:00 A.M., wherefrom they were sent for medical examination and thereafter they returned back to Police Station, where in front of Additional S.P., Khimi Ram and injured party explained their respective versions. Despite advice of Additional S.P., Khimi Ram did not agree to resolve the dispute and they left the Police Station. Thereafter husband of Yuma Devi received a telephonic call from Raj Kumar, who was with Chander Kiran alias Gaurav, Sidhu, one Advocate and brother-in-law of Khimi Ram for the whole day. Raj Kumar had suggested to resolve the dispute by sitting together, but husband of victim had replied that Khimi Ram did not pay heed to the advice of Additional S.P., therefore, there is least possibility of compromise and had stated that tomorrow they shall meet in Police Station. At 6:00 P.M., Gaurav again called them telephonically and said that incident, which had taken place was not a good thing and asked to resolve the matter by sitting together. At 6:00 P.M., Gaurav again called them telephonically and said that incident, which had taken place was not a good thing and asked to resolve the matter by sitting together. By that time, they reached near Water Edge Café, but movement of their vehicle was blocked by parking a Scorpio in the middle of the road and Khimi Ram alias Kewlu, Sidhu, Vijay, brother-in-law of Khimi (Akhil) and other persons came from front side and some persons came from back side and hit their vehicle with stones and when they stopped the vehicle, assailants attacked the couple and husband of complainant was taken to back side of the vehicle and was beaten badly by breaking his foot and causing other injuries and she was also beaten on the seat of vehicle. Assailants tried to pull her out, but she held the liver of gear with her leg, as such they could not pull her out. They torn her clothes and molested her, apart from breaking her arms and leg. She has given details of role of accused persons in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and statement recorded on oath before Judicial Magistrate First Class. 9. As per prosecution case, after having CCTV Footage of Café, it has been found that assailants were present in café since about quarter to 4:00 P.M. on 25.8.2021 and they were waiting for victims and the moment victims reached there, they stopped their vehicle and attacked them. In CCTV Footage one Ritik was also found present, who has been interrogated intensively and in his statement he has also stated that Khimi Ram, Vijay, Sidhu and Akhil and some other persons unknown to him were present in Café and were discussing about some matter at a side and they were trying to hide something from him. He has also witnessed the incident and had stated that Akhil was also involved in the attack. 10. Earlier petitioner had approached this Court by Cr.MP(M) No. 190 of 2022 for enlarging him on bail. The said petition was dismissed on merits on 20th June, 2022. Thereafter, another petition Cr.MP(M) No. 177 of 2024 was dismissed as withdrawn on 2nd February, 2024. 11. 10. Earlier petitioner had approached this Court by Cr.MP(M) No. 190 of 2022 for enlarging him on bail. The said petition was dismissed on merits on 20th June, 2022. Thereafter, another petition Cr.MP(M) No. 177 of 2024 was dismissed as withdrawn on 2nd February, 2024. 11. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that apart from the contradictions and improvements in statement of complainant/victim recorded under Sections 154 Cr.PC, 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., there is no direct evidence of involvement of petitioner in the commission of crime. There is no scientific evidence on record indicating involvement of petitioner, because on analysis neither blood was found on clothes of petitioner nor DNA profiling of deceased and victim found on his (petitioner’s) clothes matched with the victim and deceased. According to him, the petitioner has not beaten deceased Paras Ram, but due to enmity between Paras Ram and Khimi Ram he has been implicated falsely, being brother-in-law of main accused Khimi Ram, only to take revenge and harass him, whereas no eye witness has substantiated the alleged presence of petitioner on the spot of commission of crime. It has been further submitted that though in CCTV footage he has been identified to be present in Cafe but he was not present there as conspirator but he was attending the party arranged by Khimi Ram and being his brother-in-law he was also invited there and he was also trying to settle the dispute between deceased Paras Ram and Khimi Ram, which was a dispute of civil nature. 12. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that all issues raised herein-above to enlarge the petitioner on bail have already been considered by this Court while rejecting the Bail Application Cr.MP(M) No.190 of 2022 filed by petitioner and, therefore, on these grounds in successive bail application, he is not entitled for bail. 13. Reiterating earlier stand of respondent/State, which has also been reproduced in status report, it has been submitted that there is scientific evidence in CCTV Footage that at the time of incident petitioner was present in Cafe along with co-accused and he had rushed along with all assailants outside the Cafe on call of Khimi Ram to assault the victim and the said fact has also been corroborated by eye witness Ritik. Further that absence of blood and DNA of deceased on the clothes of petitioner is not relevant because his presence has been duly established through scientific evidence i.e. CCTV footage as well as statements of Ritik and victim Yuma Devi. 14. Learned counsel for petitioner has further submitted that apart from aforesaid grounds being pleaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail, it is also a relevant fact to be considered to enlarge him on bail that he was arrested in August, 2021 and he is behind the bars since last about 2 years 9 months whereas pace of trial is very slow and till date only 4 witnesses, out of total 92 witnesses, have been examined and trial has been fixed for recording evidence of prosecution on 22nd June, 2024. It has been submitted that he is only son of his parents and his mother is facing serious ailment and is under treatment from Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla. Referring aforesaid circumstances, learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is entitled for bail. According to him, these grounds have not been considered in earlier Bail Application Cr.MP(M) No. 190 of 2022 filed by petitioner. 15. Learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that apart from other evidence, mobile location of petitioner has also indicated that he was present on spot of commission of offence and on that day, he had made 9 calls to co-accused Vijay and 12 calls to co-accused Sidhu which clearly indicates that he was also part of conspiracy to kill deceased Paras Ram. 16. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that in present case deceased Paras Ram has been murdered and his wife Yuma Devi has been injured in brutal way by hatching a conspiracy by accused persons including the petitioner in a planned and organized manner and murder was committed on National Highway in an open public place in a brutal manner and, therefore, period of detention of petitioner as under-trial prisoner for 2 years and 9 months is not a valid ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail, rather, keeping in view the impact of incident and decision of bail application on society, present petition deserves to be dismissed. 17. Petitioner is an accused in a heinous crime under Section 302 IPC, wherein cold blooded murder has been committed in a planned and organized manner. 17. Petitioner is an accused in a heinous crime under Section 302 IPC, wherein cold blooded murder has been committed in a planned and organized manner. It is not a case where a person had expired in a scuffle or on account of an incident taken place for sudden provocation. In this case, it appears that victims were traced, trapped and beaten badly and, injuries caused to victims are sufficient to draw conclusion that intention of assailants was clear to finish them. 18. Taking into consideration submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Advocate General and also material on record including statements of victim, MLCs of Victim, nature of injuries received by victims, possibility of mental state of Yuma Devi at the time of recording her statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. and also statement of Ritik and Ravinder Negi and conclusion of investigation and also considering the nature, gravity and manner of commission of offence viz-a-viz period of detention, but without commenting upon merits of the case, however, taking into consideration parameters and factors required to be taken into consideration at the time of considering bail application, I find that it is not a case where no prima facie case at all is made out against the petitioner. Therefore, I do not find it a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail at this stage. 19. Observations made in this petition hereinbefore, shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner and are strictly confined for the disposal of the bail application. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.