RATTAN LAL NAGORI Vs. BAHL CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BAHL Chand, Ram Devi, Sharda Devi and Mohan Lal were arrested in case as registered under FIR No. 192, dated 10th July, 1982. Police Station City Sirsa, under Sections 302 read with section 34 and 120-B, Indian Penal Code. The prosecution story in brief is that Bala Devi who was married to Bhal Chand in February, 1981, was murdered by the accused on 9th July, 1982. Ram Devi accused is the mother and Mohan Lal accused is the brother of Bhal Chand accused. Sarda Devi accused is the wife of Mohan Lal accused. Along with these accused, some other persons were also arrested but the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa granted bail to them vide order dated 4th September, 1982, but had rejected the bail application of the present accused. However, later, vide order, dated 17th November, 1982. He granted bail to the present accused also as in his opinion some new evidence had come during the investigation.

(2.) RATTAN Lal complainant has filed this application under Section 439(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, for the cancellation of the bail of the above named four accused. The main grounds alleged are that bail application of the said four accused had been earlier rejected and there was ocular evidence and other evidence to connect them with the murder of Bala Devi and, therefore, they should not have been granted bail and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, had exercised his discretion arbitrarily. It is also urged that the said accused are trying to tamper with the evidence by threatening the complainant (petitioner) and his family members not to pursue the case, they would be killed.

(3.) THUS , the only allegation of the petitioner to be considered is whether the above accused are tempering with the service. It has to be noted that the State has not moved any application for cancellation of the bail of the above accused on the ground that any prosecution witness has been threatened with dire consequences by the accused in case they deposed against them. Therefore, the bald allegation of the complainant-pertitioner that he and his family members are being threatened by the accused cannot be given any weight. It is not at all stated in the affidavit as to in what manner the accused have conveyed the threat to them and whether they lodged any report to the police about the threat uttered by the accused. The complainant is of the Ganganagar (Rajasthan). There are said to be some eye-witnesses of the occurrence and they must be residing in Sirsa. None of them has approached the police or filed any affidavit in this court alleging that the accused are inducing or threatening them not to depose against them. I think the complainant has filed this application in a revengful spirit because the accused who are allegedly responsible for the death of his sister have been enlarged on bail.