Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8036 of 2019 Applicant :- Ansh @ Kallu @ Prashant Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Kumar Yadav,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ansh @ Kallu @ Prashant, over second bail application, Sri Munne Lal, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of this second bail application, the accused-applicant, who is involved in case crime no. 420 of 2017, under Section 307 IPC, Police Station, Talgram, District Kannauj, has prayed for enlargement on bail.
First Bail Application was rejected by the then Justice Ravindra Nath Kakkar, who has demitted his office.
All the grounds, written in the second bail application, were taken at the time of disposal of the first bail application, except one development that statement of PW-1, informant, has been recorded before the Trial Court.
Learned counsel for the present accused-applicant argued that examination-in-chief of informant is intact, but in cross- examination, he has deviated from his previous statement and has not supported prosecution case, hence accused-applicant be enlarged on bail.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed prayer for bail.
First information report of case crime number 420 of 2017 was lodged at Police Station Talgram, District Kannauj, at an interval of half an hour of the occurrence by Vishram Singh against Ansh @ Kallu, Ankit and Arjun @ Janu. Accusation was dragging of Kunti by Ankit and Arjun and upon protest of giving of fire arm shot over Kunti by Ansh, while Kunti, alongwith her Aunty, Raj Kumari, wife of Vishram Singh, was on their way to satisfy natural call. Meaning thereby, informant was not an eye witness account of the occurrence, rather he perceived occurrence, just after the occurrence and he submitted report instantly and this much is supported in his examination-in-chief. Crucial witness is Kunti, Raj Kumari and others, who have perceived occurrence and they have yet not been examined. Examination of PW-1, Vishram Singh, recorded in examination-in-chief and deviation in examination in cross, itself, prima facie reveals tampering of evidence and for avoiding any such tampering, under all above facts and circumstances, no ground for bail is made out.
Accordingly, second bail application, stands rejected.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 bgs/