JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh, J.
1. Heard Sri S.P.S. Raghav, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Anil Raghav, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ajai Sengar, learned Counsel for the complainant.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the First Information Report of this case has been lodged by Smt. Asha Devi against the applicant only on 10.3.2006 at 7.45 P.M. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 10.3.2006 at about 4.00 P.M. The distance of the police station was about 9 Kl.mts. from the place of the occurrence. It is further alleged that one Km. Poonam Tiwari, daughter of Smt. Pulwa was living at the house of the deceased. The deceased was real maternal uncle of Km. Poonam Tiwari and the first informant Smt. Asha Dwivedi is real sister of the deceased. The deceased was intended to perform the marriage of Km. Poonam Tiwari by bearing all the marriage expenses, due to this reason the applicant being the son of the deceased was too much annoyed and often hurled abuses and extending a threat of committing murder of the deceased in case Km. Poonam is not expelled from his house. on the date of the alleged occurrence, the first informant and other witnesses saw that the applicant was causing the injury on the person of the deceased by using knife blows at about 4.00 P.M. on canal way in the vicnity of the village Harsinghpur, after receiving the injuries the deceased died on thespot. According to the post-mortam examination report, the deceased had received seven ante mortam incised wounds.
3. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the son of the deceased, the F.I.R. has been lodged by the sister of the deceased, all the witnesses are highly interested and partisaned, their presence at the place of the occurrence is highly doubtful. Even according to the prosecution version, they were chance witnesses. It is further contended that the deceased was murdered at the lonely place far away from the village abadi and there was no witness of the locality to support the prosecution story. The applicant has been falsely implicated only to user his land and property. The prosecution story is not corroborated by the post-mortem examination report because the nature of all injuries shows that same were net caused by a weapon, when these were caused by more than two weapons. According to the First Information Report the injuries were caused by using knofe blows. In respect of the same incident, a complaint case No. 856 of 2006 by Smt. Kamla against Smt. Asha Dwivedi, the first informant of this case has been feded alleging therein that the deceased has been murdered by Smt. Asha and others. The deceased was caught hold by Smt. Asha and injuries were caused by Rair Lakhan by using the swordblows. In respect of the same incident, two versions have come forward which makes the whole prosecution story doubtful. It is further contended that the alleged motive is absolutely false and baseless and there was no reason to commit the murder of his father by the applicant and the applicant is not having any criminal antecedents, therefore he may be released on bail.
4. In reply to above contention, the learned A.G.A. and learned Counsel for the complainant submit that the applicant is son of the deceased, he has caused injuries by using the knife, the deceased had received seven ante mortem incided wounds and the alleged occurrence has been witnessed by the first informant and others. There was strong motive to commit the alleged offence, the First Information Report was promptly lodged without any delay, therefore the applicant may not be released on bail.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and seriousness of the nature of the allegations trade against the applicant and submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is not entitled for bail. Therefore the prayer for bail is refused.
6. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.