SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Sheela Vaidya, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Shailendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the informant / complainant.

(2.) In compliance of the order dtd. 9/1/2023 the learned AGA has produced the medical examination report of the present applicant which was provided to him by Superintendent of Jail, Pratapgarh. The aforesaid report indicates some ailment of the applicant, however, those ailments are not serious. As per the doctors the applicant has been suffering from Headache and HTN and Atypical Chest Pain and N.LVEF. As per report the applicant is being provided proper treatment. The medical reports are taken on record.

(3.) It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 13/7/2022 in Case Crime No. 141 of 2022 u/s 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506 IPC, 1860 and Sec. 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, P.S. Hathigaon, District Pratapgarh. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. In the F.I.R. the allegations have been levelled against five accused persons including the applicant. The present applicant is a Village Pradhan of the area and the complainant is former Village Pradhan of the area. The implication of the present applicant in the present F.I.R. is an outcome of the political rivalry between the applicant and the complainant. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure no. 3 which is a C.D.R. report to show that at the date and time of the incident the location of the present applicant was not found at the place of incident. Even as per the CCTV footage the present applicant was not present at the place of incident in question. Learned counsel has drawn further attention of this Court towards the statement of the eye- witnesses who have stated that on account of free-fight between the two groups the victim suffered injuries, however, it has not been indicated in such statement that the present applicant has inflicted any injury upon the victim. On the basis of material available on record the applicant was not even responsible for the incident in question. Cognizance has been taken in this case. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.