GAURAV BHARAT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. This bail cancellation application has been filed by Gaurav Bharat, informant of crime No. 585 of 2006. Under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 325, 379 I. P. C. , police station Purani Basti, District Basti seeking cancellation of bail of accused respondents Ram Kumar, Ramesh Kumar, Anil Kumar and Ashish @ Anshu granted in the aforesaid crime number which has been allowed to them by C. J. M. Basti vide his bail granting order dated 29-9-2006 vide Annexure No. 3.

(2.) THE prosecution allegations against the applicants, as is perceptible from the F. I. R. , Annexure No. 1, are that the accused is a distant relative of Sahmbhu Nath, Mausa of informant Gaurav Bahrat and the informant resides with him. Ram Kumar and Shambhu Nath are on enemical terms with each other. Because of the enimosity on 22-8-2006 Ram Kumar had called Dimple @ Brij Kishore Singh along with his associates, who had came in three Safari, one Quails and one Bolero cars armed with firearms. Ram Kumar, Ramesh Kumar, Anil Kumar and Ashish @ Anshu along with their servant Shiv Lal and ten other people entered into the shop of Ram Kumar and there they committed dacoity of gold ornaments in the shop and bet Gaurav Bharat informant, his Mausa Shambhu Nath and Mausi Raj Kumari Devi. THE accused persons escaped from the place of the incident firing in the air. This incident was witnessed by Shiv Narayan Gupta, Bishun Gupta, Audhya, Vishambher and many others. Informant lodged the F. I. R. against the accused on the same day at 5. 20 p. m. as crime number 585 of 2006 under Sections 395/397 IPC at police Station Purani Basti District Basti. THE respondents accused applied for their bail before Session Judge, Basti in the afore said crime number for offences under Section 395/397 IPC after the same was rejected by the Magistrate concerned vide criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1028 of 2006 and Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1029 of 2006. Sessions Judge Basti rejected both the bail applications of the accused on 4-9- 2006.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant contended that the bail has been wrongly granted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate to respondents, namely, Ram Kumar, Ramesh Kumar, Anil Kumar and Ashish @ Anshu as the same was already rejected by the Sessions Judge, Basti. He contented that the incident had taken place in a high handed manner and therefore, bail should not have been granted to the accused respondents. He further contended that the informant had sustained 12 injuries in the incident along with the Shambhu Nath whose injuries were found to be grievous in nature. He further submitted that the incident had occurred for non-fulfilment of illegal demand and therefore, the respondents should not have been allowed bail by the Magistrate.