DEEPAK VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. This application has been filed by the applicant Deepak Verma with prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 290 of 2006 under Sections 302 I. P. C. , Police Station Kotwali, District Mathura. The prosecution story in brief is that the F. I. R. of this case has been lodged by Purushottam Das Bhatia on 11-6-2006 at about 11. 45 p. m. in respect of an incident which I had occurred on 11-6-2006 at about 9. 30 p. m. The F. I. R. has been lodged against applicant and two unknown miscreants alleging therein that the applicant was living as a tenant at the house of one Mahendra Singh for the last three years but prior to 20 days of the alleged occurrence he alongwith his family members shifted to their newly constructed house. Even then he was generally visiting the Mohalla of first informant because he was a criminal minded person. The deceased Manoj objected the applicant for his visits in the Mohalla. That is why the applicant was having enmity with the deceased and one week prior to the alleged incident he had extended threat to the deceased for facing dire consequences. On 11-6-2006 the deceased alongwith his wife Smt. Mamta Bhatia came on the Sindhi Dharmashala on a motorcycle, the deceased came out from the Dharmashala where the applicant was waiting. The applicant hurled abuses and discharged shot by a country-made pistol which hit the chest of the deceased. After receiving injury the deceased fell down. The first informant also came out from the Dharmashala and saw the deceased in an injured condition and the applicant was running away from the place of occurrence. The applicant was chased by him but by riding on a motorcycle he escaped from there in the company of two unknown miscreants. The deceased was taken to the district hospital from where he was referred to Maheshwari Hospital where he was declared dead. Thereafter the dead-body was taken to the district hospital and informant went to the Police Station and lodged the F. I. R. According to the post-mortem examination report the deceased received one firearm wound of entry which was having blackening and tattoing.

(2.) HEARD Sri J. S. Sengar and Sri Sudhir Solanki, learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. and Sri Satish Trivedi, Senior Advocate, assisted Sri Rahul Chaturvedi, learned Counsel for the complainant.

(3.) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case and the Emissions made by the Counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. and learned Counsel for the complainant and considering the role of the applicant and its gravity and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant is, prima facie, not entitled for bail. The bail application is accordingly rejected. Application rejected. .