AJAI LODHI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Vijay Bahadur Shivhare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant as well as learned AGA and perused the record.

(2.) THE instant bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant with alternate prayer to release him on short term bail for six months in case crime no.831 of 2011, under Sections 302, 307 IPC, P.S. Chikasi, District Hamirpur, during the pendency of bail application before this Court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of complainant has opposed the prayer for releasing the applicant on short term bail, and contended that, the applicant's wife, Virodha is also an accused in the present case, who was released on bail as the role of exhortation was attributed to her. She received minor injury in that incident. After grant of parole to the applicant, there is apprehension of their absconding. The affidavit filed in support of the bail application as well as in support of the supplementary affidavit, have been filed by the wife of the applicant, Virodha, as deponent, who has also put his signature in both the affidavits. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that she is facing great difficulty in doing her personal work, and the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant, that she is a totally cripple woman becomes falsified. So far as the children are concerned, she has three children, and the elder son is of eighteen years of age, which has wrongly been mentioned in the bail application that the children are minor. The medical report also appears to be a fake document which requires strict proof. In the family of the applicant, there are four brothers of the applicant, namely, Bhanu Pratap, Ashok Kumar, Bhanu Singh and Ajay Singh, in this regard a copy of parivar register has been annexed with the counter affidavit, thus, it is wrong to say that there is no elderly member in the family to took her for treatment, if it is needed. The wife of the applicant has also three brothers namely Rajendra, Sughar and Kalloo, who are residing merely fifteen kilometers away from her. The affidavits have been sworn on wrong facts and are defective as the age of the deponent(the wife of the applicant) is mentioned in two affidavits as 30 years and 41 years respectively. The applicant's wife is absolutely hale and hearty and she could have examined herself by the said doctor with regard to her ailment. There is no ground to release the applicant on short term bail, as it has been moved with the sole purpose, either to abscond or to commit another offence. The examination in chief of P.W.1 has already been concluded, but his cross examination has yet not been concluded and the dates are being fixed by the court below successively. In case the applicant is released on short term bail, he will try to flee from justice and will cause delay in trial, therefore, the parole application deserves to be rejected.