RAJ BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. Mishra, J. Supplementary affidavit filed be placed on record.

(2.) THIS is second application for bail. The first bail application was rejected on merits. The learned Counsel for the ap plicant contended that the applicant had no motive to commit the crime as in view of the adoption deed executed by the deceased the property would have been inherited by the adopted son of the deceased. The applicant had obtained suf ficient property by Will executed by the collaterals. The informant is an inimical witness and he had motive to commit the murder of the deceased. The prosecution case is unnatural and no reason has been assigned why Raj Bahadur was not as saulted if he was present at the scene of occurrence of offence. The prosecution case is falsified by medical evidence. On post-mortem examination the stomach was found to be empty. The informant had stated that the deceased had taken samosa and tea in the market.

(3.) THE learned AGA contended that the deceased could have taken samosa and tea as soon as he reached the market, and therefore, by the time the incident took place he had 4-1/2 - 5-1/2 hours which is sufficient to digest the samosa taken by him. He contended that the statement of the witnesses should not be taken with precision and accuracy and allowance may be given in the matter of time and dura tion.