VIRENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This application has been filed by the applicant Virendra Singh with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 44 of 2006 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 395, 397, 427, 34, 504 and 506, I.P.C., P.S. Paniyara district Mahrajganj.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Kamlesh Yadav at P.S. Paniyara on 2.2.2006 at 9.50 p.m., in respect of the incident which had occurred on 1.2.2006 at about 9.00 p.m., alleging therein that the marriage of the first informant was settled with Km. Maya, daughter of late Mata Badal. THE date of the marriage was 1.2.2006. On 1.2.2006, the marriage party was preparing for dwarpooja and proceeded towards the door of late Mata Badal alongwith road light and band party. THE baraties were dancing and singing, when the barat reached in front of house of the applicant, the applicant and other co-accused assaulted the baraties and the applicant discharged the shot by firearm from a very close range which hit at the temporal region of the deceased Dinesh, consequently, he fell down, other baraties including Amarjeet, Rajman also sustained injuries caused by lathi and danda blows and the motor vehicles were also damaged by the applicant and other co-accused persons and looted a sum of Rs. 50,000 cash, ornaments and cloths. THE applicant and co-accused Pappu Singh having firearm hurled the abuses and extended the threats to the baraties, due to this incident the panic was created. THE deceased Dinesh was taken to the Sadar Hospital in an injured condition where he was declared dead. THE other injured were also medically examined there. Due to this unhappening the marriage could not be solemnized. According to the post mortem examination report the deceased had received one firearm wound of entry near the left ear. It was having blackening and charring. Its exit wound was injury No. 2. Other injured namely Rajman and Amarjeet had received injuries caused by the hard and blunt object.

(3.) IN reply of the above contention the learned A.G.A. submits that specific role of causing injuries by firearm is assigned to the applicant and due to act done by the applicant the marriage of the first informant could not be solemnized. The F.I.R. was promptly lodged within 50 minutes of the alleged occurrence. The injured witnesses have supported the prosecution story. The alleged occurrence had witnessed by so many other persons also. There was no reason of false implication of the applicant. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. The firearm wound of entry was having blackening and charring. It was caused from a close range as mentioned in the F.I.R. the applicant is main accused, therefore, he may not be released on bail.