MAHENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M.M. Singhvi and M.L. Garg for the petitioner and Mr. U.C.S. Singhvi Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Bhagwati Prasad counsel for the complainant.

(2.) It is clear from the first information report that deceased Malkitsingh had died as a result of gun-shot fired by Dalsingh. Narendra Singh son of Malkitsingh was also injured from the gun-shot fired by Dalsingh. In the FIR. the part attributed to Mahendra Singh was that he had a 'mouser' in his hand by which he fired but it did not hit any body. The gun was recovered from the possession of Dalsingh, So far as 'mouser' was concerned, it was recovered from the roof of a shop marked 'I' in the site plan. The Police filed a charge sheet against 7 accused persons in which the petitioner Mahendra Singh was not challenged by the Police. Instead of Mahendra Singh it was Major Singh who was related both to the deceased and Dalsingh, was challenged. On going through the police statements recorded by the police during investigation it appears that Narendra Singh, Surendra Singh and Jagtar Singh have mentioned the presence of the petitioner with a 'mouser' at the time of the incident and his firing shot from 'mouser' which did not hit any body, Narendra Singh and Surendra Singh are the sons of the deceased while Jagtarsingh is also related to them. Another set of witness examined during the investigation are Banaram, Herchand, Om, Baldeosingh and Om Bishnoi. They have denied the presence of the petitioner Mahendra Singh on this part. The police has also recorded statements of witnesses, namely, Mamram, Niranjanlal, Kailash Chandra, Bahadur Ram and Mohan Lal who have stated about the presence of the petitioner, at his house which is at a distance from the place of incident. There is another set of witnesses examined during the course of investigation, namely. Banwarilal, Vilaskumar and Ramsingh who deposed about the meting of the petitioner with Dalsingh near Railway crossing after the incident during which the petitioner is said to have scolded Dalsingh for firing shot to the deceased Malkitsingh. After recording these police statements, the police came to the conclusion that it was Majorsingh who was present at the time of the incident and not the petitioner Mahendra Singh who is son of Dalsingh. On a protest petition filed by the complainant, the Magistrate took cognizance as against the petitioner also.

(3.) Prima facie it appears that no further investigation with Mahendra Singh remains with the police inasmuch as the 'mouser' has been recovered from the roof of shop No. 1. The police did not as a result of investigation find the petitioner as the person present at the time of the incident. In any event, there is conflicting statement of the witnesses examined during the course of investigation regarding the presence of Mahendra Singh. Admittedly, the alleged shot imputed to him from 'mouser' did not hit any body and did not hit any one. Looking to all these facts and circumstances of the case and specially that there is conflicting statements of the witnesses examined during investigation that the 'mouser' was recovered from over the roof of the shop and further that the shot imputed to Mahendra Singh did not injure any body, it appears to be a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.