GULSHAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appli ­cation has been filed by the applicant Gul ­shad with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 174 of 2005 un ­der sections 452, 307, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C., P.S. Kokhraj, District Kaushambi.

(2.) THE facts in brief of this case are that the FIR of this case has been lodged by Anwar Ahmad on 19.6.2005 at 09.30 a.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 19.6.2005 at about 09.00 a.m. It is alleged that co -accused Irshad had taken the loan from the Bank at the name of Ilias, the younger brother of the deceased Mohd. Ayub, on account of this dispute there was tension in both the parties consequently the applicant and co -accused discharged the shots by their country made pistol and li ­censed gun at the deceased Mohd. Ayub consequently he sustained gun shot inju ­ries. The deceased Baby @ Tavassum the daughter of the deceased Mohd. Ayub came in rescue, she also sustained gun shot injuries. The FIR was lodged under sections 452, 307, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. but on the same day of the alleged incident both the injured Ayub and Baby @ Tavassum suc ­cumbed to their injuries. According to the post -mortem examination reports the de ­ceased Mohd. Ayub had sustained two gun shot wound of entries having two gun shot wound of exit and the deceased Baby @ Tavassum had also sustained two gun shot wound of entry having two gun shot wounds of exit. The statement of both the deceased were recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C, they also made the allegation of firing against the applicant and co -accused Irshad, It is alleged that the applicant was armed with country made pistol and the co -accused Irshad was armed with licensed gun.

(3.) IT is contended by learned Counsel for the applicant that the prosecution story is fully concocted and highly improbable. The presence of the first informant and other witnesses at the alleged place of oc ­currence was highly doubtful. The state ­ment of the deceased persons were re ­corded under section 161 Cr.P.C. whereas according to the injuries sustained by them it was not possible to them to narrate the story as recorded by the I.O. in their statements recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. which shows that the investigation was not fair and there was no eye -witness to sup ­port the prosecution story. The applicant is in jail since 26.6.2005. He was having no criminal antecedent.