Heard Sri Shivaji Srivastava and Sri Sudhir Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Dilip Kumar Nishad alias Kaloo with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 580 of 2009 under sections 147,148,149,302,307/34 and section 120-B I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act P.S. Naini district Allahabad.
The facts in brief of this case are that the F.I.R. has been lodged by Gagan Kumar Nishad at P.S. Naini on 3.10.2011 at 9.30 p.m. in respect of the incident allegedly occurred at about 6.00 p.m. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R., the co-accused Pintu Mehra, Arvind Mehra, Kakoo Mehra, and Mahindra are named in the F.I.R. and four miscreants were unknown. It is alleged that on 3.10.2008 at about 6.00 p.m. the first informant was returning from Sangam by Bulero car no. U.P.70-AD-6966, the car was driver by the first informant, his father was on the adjoining seat of the driver, on the rear set Ashok Nishad, Tao of the first informant, Vinai Nishad, brother of the first informant was sitting, when the vehicle reached near Lokpur Tiraha where on Qualis and Safari vehicle and on motor cycle, the applicant, co-accused persons were already sitting they were watching the arrival of the first informant and others, the co-accused Pinto Mehra, discharged the shot causing injury by D.B.B.L. gun at the temporal region of the father of the first informant, thereafter, the other miscreants came out from Qualis and Safari, they discharged shots and hurling bombs, consequently the first informant also sustained injures, he was escaping from the place of occurrence in the company of the first informant, because the brother of the first informant was also killed. The first informant and his Tao Ashok Nishad were chased by the miscreants, they discharged the shots and hurled the bombs but the first informant and his Tao, Ashok Nishad were beyond their reach, due to firing and hurling bombs, a panic was created and the people closed the door and windows of their houses, the first informant came back and saw that his father was lying dead in the vehicle, it is a case in which two persons have been killed and one person has sustained injuries, the deceased Anirudh alias Barru had sustained 22 ante mortem injuries and the deceased Vinay Kumar Nishad had sustained 8 ante mortem injuries, the name of the applicant came to light during investigation, the applicant applied for bail, before the learned Sessions Judge, Allahabad, who rejected the same on 6.1.2011.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. whereas the other co-accused persons are named in the F.I.R. The naming of the applicant is after thought. The statement of the applicant was recorded on 13.10.2009 in which he disclosed the name of the applicant, the name of the applicant has been disclosed by the first informant, Ashok Nishad also, the statement of the witness Naseem was recorded on 5.10.2009 he also disclosed the name of the applicant, the statement of Mahendra Singh was also recorded on 16.10.2009, he also disclosed the name of the applicant, the disclosure of the name of the applicant is after thought. The applicant was residing in the same locality where the first informant was residing, his house was at a distance of 50 meter, he was well known to the first informant from his birth. The deceased Anirudh was a harden criminal, he was involved in criminal cases P.S. Naini, Daraganj and Kedganj, he was involved in 21 criminal cases including murder and kidnapping etc. he had multi- cornered enmity, the alleged incident has been committed by some unknown miscreants, but subsequently the name of the applicant was involved due to ill will of the fist informant. There was no motive or intention to commit the alleged incident. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution story, the applicant is innocent, he may be released on bail, the applicant is in jail since 2.11.2009.
In reply to the above contention it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that it is a case in which on account of old enmity in a pre- planned manner the alleged incident has been committed in which two persons have lost their lives and one person sustained injuries. It is a case which is linked to the chain of the murder, the deceased persons have sustained injuries caused by firearm and bomb blast, the name of the applicant has been disclosed by the first informant on the same day of the incident, in such situation, it was not impossible to identify all the accused persons at the same time by the first informant, the trial of the applicant is in progress. In case he is released on bail, he may tamper with the evidence.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. and from the perusal of the record it appears that it is a case in which two persons have been killed and one person had sustained firearm injuries. The deceased persons had sustained injuries caused by the firearm and bomb blast, the name of the applicant has been disclosed on the same day by the first informant Gagan Nishad, his name was disclosed by other witnesses Ashok Nishad, Naseem, thereafter, the witness Ashok Nishad, Naseem and Marhendra Nisahd disclosed the name of the applicant, according to their statements the applicant actively participated in the commission of the alleged offense. The trial of the applicant is in progress, the gravity of the offense is too much, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail, the prayer for bail is refused.
Accordingly the bail application is rejected.
Dt. 12.10.2011 NA