SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Sunil Kumar who is detained in case crime no.162 of 2008 under Sections 302/324/504/506 IPC, Police Station Khiro, District Rae Bareli. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and perused the record. It is alleged by the prosecution that the accused applicant Sunil Kumar on 14.4.2008 at about 6.30 p.m. caused injuries to Arun Kumar, as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries. Initially the case was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 324,504 and 506 I.P.C. but on the death of Arun Kumar an addition was made for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. It is argued on behalf of the accused applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated and there is no reliable evidence against him; that there is cross version of the incident and accused has also received injuries in the said incident which has not been explained by the prosecution in the F.I.R. and that the co-accused Bholi Devi who happens to be mother of the applicant has been admitted to bail and as such the applicant deserves bail. The bail is however opposed by learned A.G.A. I have carefully considered the respective submissions made by the parties alongwith the grounds taken by the applicant in his bail application. It is a day light murder. The applicant is named in the F.I.R. as sole accused. Eye witness account of the incident is available. There are sufficient materials to connect the applicant with the crime in question. It is settled law that at the stage of consideration of bail application, detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of merit of the case is not required to be undertaken. Broad spectrum of the case is to be seen at this stage apart from nature of the proposed evidence and severity of the offence and punishment. The offence is of very serious nature. The case of co-accused admitted to bail, is not at par with the case against the applicant. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. The bail is therefore refused and the application for bail is rejected. However, it is directed that the learned trial court shall decide the trial expeditiously preferably within six months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order. Office is also directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned.