(1.) By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 588 of 2012, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 307, 302 and 120-B IPC, P. S.-Tappal, district-Aligarh and is in jail since 9.1.2013, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that in pursuance of the F. I. R. lodged by one Satapl Singh on 28.11.2012 at about 6.30 P. M. at P. S.-Tappal, district-Aligarh with regard to an occurrence which had taken place at about 5.30 P. M. on the same day in which one person Mukesh had been shot dead, Case Crime No. 588 of 2012 under Sections-147, 148, 149, 307, 302 and 120-B IPC was registered against Hoshiyar Singh, Satendra alias Satveer, Ramesh, Dinesh alias Kukdud, Sonu, Pramod, Praveen and the applicant Rakesh. In the F. I. R. it was alleged that on 28.11.2012 while Mukesh (deceased), brother of the informant was coming back from his brick kiln in Brijnagla along with Mukesh, Manveer and Dharmendra in his car to village Bajaota, P. S.-Tappal and as soon as his car turned from the main road to the branch road to leading to Bajota, the accused who were sitting in a white Scorpio car bearing registration No. HR-51-AH-6699 stopped the deceased's car and started firing indiscriminately at the deceased who was sitting inside the car with their firearms (rifles, pistols and country made pistols). The deceased got out of the car and ran to save his life whereupon he was rounded up by all the accused and his body was pumped with bullets by them. Upon hearing the sound of the gunfire, a huge crowd gathered at the place of occurrence whereupon all the accused made good their escape by running away from the place of occurrence in their car and a motorcycle. While the accused were running away from the place of occurrence they were seen by Bhagat Singh and Praveen also who had also reached the place of occurrence. The injured Mukesh was rushed to the hospital in his car where he was declared brought dead. Thereafter the inquest was conducted and post mortem of the dead body of the deceased was performed on the same day. The post mortem report of the deceased indicated eight firearm wounds of entry and corresponding number of exit wounds of firearm, apart from two abrasions. The Investigating Officer prepared a site plan of the place of incident. During investigation the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the complainant under Section 161 Cr. P. C. apart from the statements of Bhagat Singh, Manveer, Dharmendra and Gyani who claimed themselves to be the eyewitnesses of the occurrence. All the eyewitnesses in their statements assigned the role of causing firearm injuries to the deceased to co-accused Dinesh alias Kudkud, Sonu and one un-known person and the role of hatching the conspiracy to eliminate the deceased to all the accused. However, on 15.1.2013 the informant Satpal Singh, and the eyewitnesses Bhagat Singh, Praveen, Dharmendra and Manveer filed their affidavits before the S. S. P., Aligarh stating therein that their statements were never recorded by the Investigating officer and their purported statements contained in the Case Diary have been manipulated by the Investigating Officer with the object of conferring undue advantage and benefit on the accused. The Investigating Officer after making a note of the affidavits of the complainant and the other eyewitnesses but without appending the aforesaid affidavits to the Case Diary submitted charge-sheet under Sections-147, 148, 149, 302, 307 and 120-B IPC against co-accused Hoshiyar Singh and Dinesh alias Kudkud while the remaining co-accused including the applicant were chargesheeted under Section-120-B IPC alone.
(3.) Heard Sri Ravi Kiran Jain, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. as well as Sri V. P. Srivastava, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Raj Singh, learned counsel for the complainant.