RAM BACHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the first bail application on behalf of the accused-applicant Ram Bachan involved in case crime no.243 of 2009 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 506 I.P.C. pertaining to police station Chakiya, district Chandauli. Heard Dr. C.P. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State on 19.5.2010 and perused the record.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant submitted that the incident took place on 10.12.2009 at 7:00 a.m. in front of Vipin Medical Store near Government Hospital, Chakiya, District Chandauli. Police party immediately reached at the place of incident whereas, the F.I.R. was lodged later on at 13:35 hours by Ram Chandra, son of the deceased. No specific weapon was assigned to the applicant in the F.I.R., but later on, during statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the witnesses improved the prosecution story and alleged that the applicant was armed with a lathi. It was further submitted that co-accused Rajdeep and Dinesh were allegedly armed with tangaris (Axes), but no incised wound was found on the person of the injured and body of the deceased, which shows that the prosecution story is not correct and the complainant was not on spot. It was further submitted that the deceased was a criminal and all the witnesses belong to the family of the deceased. Injured Ram Janam was not interrogated by the police till the date of filing of the bail application.

(3.) INCIDENT took place at 7:00 a.m. in the market. There was enmity between the parties. Applicant was named in the F.I.R. and had a lathi with him at the time of incident. Lathi injuries were found on the person of the injured and body of the deceased. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and gravity of the offence, I do not find it to be a fit case for bail.