SHIV SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHIV Shanker, J. This is first bail application moved on behalf of the applicant.

(2.) THE prosecution story, in brief, is that the first informant Ravi Kumar son of Phulan Singh alongwith his brother Sanjeev Kumar and his mother Smt. Ved Shree was returning to their house from their field on 13-11-2005 at 9. 00 a. m. When they reached in front the house of Ram Kishan, accused persons Shiv Singh, Sahdeo Singh and Siya Ram surrounded them and started abusing to which objection was raised by them. THEreafter, Shiv Singh (accused-applicant) went to his house and brought country made pistol. THE other accused were armed with gun and lathi. Accused Shiv Singh opened fire upon the chest of Sanjeev Kumar and other co-accused assaulted the informant and his mother due to which they also received injuries in the alleged occurrence. Sanjeev Kumar died on the spot due to the sustaining of firearm injuries. THEreafter, First Information Report was lodged by Ravi Kumar on 13-11-2005 at 11. 55 a. m. at the concerned police station.

(3.) IT is further contended that the Investigating Officer did not find blood on the place of occurrence and, therefore, no blood stained earth was taken by him as mentioned by the Investigating Officer in the case diary. This fact makes the place of occurrence doubtful and it appears that the deceased was killed somewhere else due to some other reason as the dead body was lying in front of the house of Ram Kishan. IT is further contended that there is no independent witness of the alleged occurrence. The Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of Ram Kishan as well as his brother Ravi Kumar were allegedly present at the time of occurrence. In the absence of any independent witness, the prosecution story becomes suspicious. IT is further contended that civil litigation is pending between the parties since last ten years and in the past, no Marpeet took place. Therefore, it is highly improbable that after ten years of the pendency of the civil litigation, without any provocation, rhyme or reason, the applicant could go to the extent of killing the deceased and this fact also rules out the participation of the accused in the occurrence and it appears that the occurrence took place due to some other reason by some other persons and just on suspicion and enmity, the applicant and others are named in the First Information Report.