AMIT PAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

(2.) The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant involved in case crime No. 401/2019, under Ss. 302, 307, 506 IPC, police station Panki, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

(3.) It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide, order dtd. 8/12/2020 and after that statement of material witnesses have been recorded. In the first information report, there was no reference of any axe and that the version regarding causing injuries by axe has been developed later on. No description of injuries or weapon was mentioned in the inquest report. The medical evidence is not consistent with the statements of alleged eye-witnesses. Learned counsel submitted that in his statement before the trial court, P.W.1. Vinay Kumar Dhangarh has stated that he cannot tell as how much time has been passed after death of deceased. Referring to statement of P.W.2 Dr. K.N. Katiyar, it was stated that it is possible that deceased might have been died soon after the incident. Further, as per statement of P.W.2 Dr. K.N. Katiyar, the death of deceased might have taken place between 3.00 PM to 9.00 PM and thus, it was a blind murder, took place in the evening. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that in fact no one has witnessed the alleged incident and that alleged eye witnesses have been introduced later on. As per post-mortem report, blackening and charring was present at the body of deceased, which does not corroborates the version of alleged eye-witnesses. Alleged witness P.W.3 Anil Kumar has not sustained any pallet injury and that his presence at the spot is highly improbable. First information report is ante-timed. No motive has been shown on the part of applicant to commit murder of deceased. At the time of alleged incident, the gun of father of the applicant was lying deposited in the police station and thus, the recovery of gun is, thoroughly doubtful. Learned counsel for applicant has raised various points regarding factual positions of the case, as mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the application, and it is submitted that there is no cogent evidence against applicant. It has been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 8/10/2019, having no criminal history and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.