Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14548 of 2021 Applicant :- Nitin Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Mishra,Adesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhinav Singh
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satish Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
Sri Abhinav Singh, learned counsel for the first informant is not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Nitin, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 137 of 2020, under Sections 302, 307 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Thana Bhawan, District Shamli.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that as per prosecution case the applicant has been assigned the role of having been armed with fawra and thereby participating in the occurrence in which four persons namely Rohit, Sanni, Ravi and Gopal are said to have received injuries and Mahesh Pal is the deceased. It is argued that perusal of the injuries of the injured and the deceased, it is apparent that the there is no injury corresponding to the use of fawra on the person of four injured persons and even on the person of the deceased. It is argued that as such implication of the applicant is false.
It is further argued that Mukesh the brother of the applicant has also received injury in the present incident which was examined, the medical examination report of Mukesh is annexure no. 2 to the affidavit. It is argued that as such the genesis of the occurrence has been suppressed by the prosecution and there is no explanation of the factum of receiving injury of Mukesh. Learned counsel further argued that the applicant has no criminal antecedents as stated in para-30 of the affidavit and is jail since 23.5.2020.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the deceased has received injury on his head which is of heavy weapon as is evident from the medical examination report of the deceased while he was in an injured condition and alive. It is argued that in the post morte examination report cause of death has been opined by the doctor as coma as a result of anti mortem head injuries. There were severe injuries on the head of the deceased and his entire head was found to be bandaged by the doctor and there were stitches on the forehead also and even there was a hematoma present over right parieto-temporal lobes with fracture on right parietal bone. It is argued that as such participation of the applicant in the present case cannot be ruled out. It is further argued that as there are four other injured persons who have stated in their statements about active participation of the applicant in the present matter.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the applicant is named in the F.I.R., there are four injured persons and one person has died in the present case. The injuries are serious in nature and the deceased has a completely broken head.
Looking to fact and circumstances of the case, nature of evidence and gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.)