Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
The accused-applicant Maiku Lal Gosai is involved and detained in Case Crime No. 187 of 2007, under Sections 394, 302, 411 I.P.C. and 3(1) U.P. Gangsters Act, from Police Station Kauriya, District Gonda and he has applied for bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the accused applicant is that as per prosecution case, the complainant Panna Lal Sonar, son of Munnu Lal, resident of village Chhiras Shukulpurwa, Police Station Kauriya, District Gonda on 5.11.2007 at about 5.30 P.M. was returning back to his home along with his father and younger brother Sahabram from Rampur Bazar where his father was running jewellary shop. His father was having golden and silver ornaments and Rs. 5,000/- in his bag. They were on cycle. When they reached near the village pond, three unknown accused came there on a motorcycle. They after starting their motorcycle started to snatch the bag from his father. When his father resisted, one of the accused opened fire on him. Consequently he sustained injuries. On hearing the sound of fire, the people of the locality immediately rushed to the spot. The accused, therefore, leaving their motorcycle fled away.
Learned counsel for the accused applicant contends that on the written report of the complainant, the police of Police Station Kauriya, registered a case under Section 394 I.P.C. against unknown accused. The complainant was examined by the Investigating Officer. After 45 minutes of the occurrence, he named the present accused applicant saying that accused had opened the fire on his father. The injured succumbed to his injuries on 6.11.2007. Therefore, the case was converted under Section 302 I.P.C. The accused applicant along with two other accused is said to have been arrested by the police on 7.11.2007 in police encounter case. The accused are said to have confessed their involvement in committing the loot and the murder of the father of the complainant. On the pointing out of the accused applicant, the police recovered golden and silver ornaments hidden by the accused in the grove near the house of the accused Janardan Gosai. The Investigating Officer thereafter added Section 411 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters Act. Learned counsel for the accused applicant further contends that the ornaments alleged to have been recovered by the Investigating Officer were required to be put for identification. The Investigating Officer instead of putting them for identification got them identified by the complainant who accompanied him to the place of recovery. The accused Janardan Gosai has already been ordered to be released on bail. The complainant has not explained as to why he could not name the accused applicant in the F.I.R. while he in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C had named the present accused applicant. The entire prosecution case appears to be doubtful and the accused applicant appears to have been falsely implicated by the complainant. The learned counsel for the accused applicant further contends that the accused applicant has been challaned under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangsters Act too. The criminal cases shown in the gang chart against the accused applicant are the criminal case registered under Section 307 I.P.C. relating to the so called encounter case and the present case. Therefore, the accused applicant deserves to be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the accused applicant and learned A.G.A. as well as keeping in view the totality of the fact and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the accused applicant may be released on bail.
Let applicant Maiku Lal Gosai be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
18.01.2010 Sanjay/-