MANOJ Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. Heard Sri G. S. Chaturvedi Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Udai Chandani learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. and Sri T. N. Joshi learned Counsel for the complainant.

(2.) THIS application has been filed by the applicant Manoj with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime No. 155 of 2005, under Sections 302, 307 and 201 I. P. C. , P. S. Kakor, District Gautambudh Nagar.

(3.) IN reply of the above contention the learned A. G. A. and learned Counsel for the complainant submitted that the alleged occurrence had taken place in a broad day light at about 3. 00 p. m. Its F. I. R. was promptly lodged. The role of firing is assigned to the applicant and co-accused, consequently the deceased and injured persons sustained fire-arm injuries. The witnesses came at the place of occurrence on hearing sound of hurling of abuses. When they came out from the shop by that time the applicant and co-accused were firing, but they have not witnessed anything happened prior hurling of the abuses or firing, the bruises would have been caused prior the hurling of abuses and firing which could not be witnessed by the witnesses, therefore, no explanation of bruises could be given. IN the present case the prosecution story is supported by the injured witnesses and they have clearly stated that the applicant has fired by the revolver and caused the injuries.