GULAB SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VINOD Prasad, J. The revisionist Gulab Singh is an accused of Case Crime No. 17 of 2006, under Sections 302, 307, 504, 506 I. P. C. for committing the murder of Sunil son of Babu on 13-1- 2006 at 5 p. m. within the boundary of village Mitali, under Police Station Kotwali Baghpat, District Baghpat. The F. I. R. of the incident was lodged by Vikram Singh, brother of the deceased at Police Station Kotwali Baghpat on 30-1-2006 at 6. 10 p. m. covering a distance of 9km. west. According to the prosecution case Sunil was shot dead in the presence of informant, Ram Chander, Rampal, Sabu and Dhramveer by Gulab Singh, the present revisionist after he was caught hold by Dhanpal and Jagmohan. The post-mortem report dated 14-1- 2006 indicates that the deceased had died because of the gunshot injuries sustained by him.

(2.) THE revisionist claimed that he was a juvenile and therefore, he was referred to Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut, Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut vide its order dated 17-8-2006 in Case No. 184 of 2006 relating to the aforesaid crime declared the revisionist to be a juvenile. THE revisionist then moved his bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board, which was rejected by it on 12-9-2006. Aggrieved by the aforesaid rejection of his bail prayer the revisionist filed an appeal being Appeal No. 212 of 2003 before the Sessions Judge, Meerut, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4 Meerut heard his aforesaid appeal and dismissed it vide its order dated 18-10-2006. Since the revisionist failed to secure release from both the Courts below, therefore, he filed Criminal Revision No. 6220 of 2006 under Section 53 of Juvenile Justice Act in conjunction with 397/401 Cr. P. C. in this Court on 10th November, 2006. His revision was allowed on 14-11-2006 and the matter was remanded back to Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 4, Meerut to decide the appeal of the revisionist afresh after getting his bad antecedents verified. Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Meerut vide his impugned order dated 15-2-2006 again dismissed the appeal of the revisionist and thereby refused to grant him bail in the aforesaid crime No. 17 of 2006, under Sections 302, 307. 504, 506 I. P. C. , P. S. Kotwali Baghpat, District Baghpat. Since the appeal of the revisionist was again dismissed he had filed the present revision.

(3.) LEARNED A. G. A. contrarily contended that the revisionist is the main shooter of serious offence under Section 302 I. P. C. in a dare devil manner in the presence of five witnesses and therefore, he should not be released on bail. LEARNED A. G. A. further contended that since the revisionist is involved in the three other offences, therefore, his chances of falling in the company of bad persons is very probable and therefore, the revisionist should not be released on bail. He further contended that other brothers of the revisionist namely Satpal, Jitendra, Karmvir have got a criminal history and are involved in a criminal case vide crime No. 234 of 2006, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 506 I. P. C. , P. S. Kotwali Baghpat, District Baghpat. Therefore, after being released on bail the revisionist will definitely indulge into more crime and consequently, his bail prayer has been rightly rejected by both the Courts below and this revision being merit less should be dismissed.