SURESH ATHWANI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Satish Trivedi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri A.K. Pandey and Sri Shesh Nath Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., Sri Vinay Saran, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

(2.) THIS bail application has been moved by the applicant Suresh Athwani with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime No. 747 of 2008 under sections 302, 34 IPC, P.S. Sigra, District Varanasi.

(3.) IT is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the first informant is not eye witness, he has lodged the FIR on hearsay as told by his son Rupesh. There is no direct eye witness account. The only allegation is that the applicant and other co-accused persons were seen by Rupesh when they were running away from the house of the deceased. There is no other evidence against the applicant even no recovery has been made from the possession of the applicant or at his pointing out. There was no enmity of the applicant with the deceased. There was a dispute over a window opening for which from both the sides FIRs have been registered. The applicant was in a reception party of one Sharad Kumar Sharma at the time of the alleged incident, he remained there from 8.30 P.M. to 11.00 P.M. where Vediography and photography was also done. According to the prosecution version also no weapon was shown in the hands of the applicant, it was shown in the hands of co-accused Jittu and Dabbu. The recovery of the said weapon had also been made at the pointing out of the co-accused Gyan Pamnani @ Dabbu. It is also surprising that the prosecution story is not corroborated by any person of the locality. The only evidence against the applicant is of the statement of Rupesh, the son of the deceased. He has been falsely implicated only on the basis of doubt and suspicion on account of the local partibandi. The applicant is not having any criminal antecedents.