JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh, J.
1. This application is filed by the applicant Rajendra alias Rajjo with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime No. 8 of 2006, under Section 302 I.P.C. and Sections 3(ii)(v) of the S.C./S.T.(P.A.) Act, P.S. Dauki, District Agra.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that in the present case the F.I.R. has been lodged by Mahesh Chandra at P.S. Dauki, district Agra on 7.1.2006 at 9.10 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 7.1.2006 at about 7.045 p.m. The distance of the police station was about 1 km from the place of occurrence. The F.I.R. was lodged only against the applicant. It is alleged that the deceased Anil was asked by the applicant to cut the varseem of his field, but the deceased refused, therefore, he was beaten by the applicant by kicks and fists, prior the alleged occurrence. Thereafter, on 7.1.2006 at about 7.45 p.m. the applicant entered into the house of the first informant. The sisters of the first informant were confined in a room and closed from outside and they were extended threat for not making hue and cry. Thereafter, the applicant strangulated the neck of the deceased by rope who was sleeping in front of the room where his sisters were confined. After committing his murder he was hanged in a hook. The alleged occurrence was witnessed by the sisters of the first informant namely Laxmi and Sonu from the window and side of the door. At the said time the first informant and his brother Munna also came there, but the applicant by pushing them ran away from the place of occurrence. The dead body of the deceased in hanging condition was found inside the room by the first informant and other. The dead body was taken down and the room of the sisters was open. They also came out from the room and narrated the whole story. The first informant went to the police station along with the dead body of the deceased and lodged the F.I.R.
3. Heard Sri S.P.S. Raghav and Sri K.K. Dwivedi learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the state of U.P. and Sri M.L. Jain learned Counsel for the complainant.
4. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that there was no motive for the applicant to commit the alleged offence. The first informant is not eye witness. Even the sisters of the first informant namely Laxmi and Sonu had not seen the alleged occurrence because as per the prosecution version they were also kept in a closed room. The applicant has been falsely implicated only on the basis of the doubt and suspicion. The applicant is old man aged bout 60 years. He has never been challaned in any criminal case. The deceased had committed suicide. The recovery of the plastic rope has been shown from the field of the applicant whereas the same rope was used in hanging the deceased in a room. During investigation the statements of Laxmi and Sonu were not recorded by the I.O. The deceased had taken a sum of Rs. 10.000/- as loan from the applicant and there was an agreement with the deceased that he will work as a labour at the house of the applicant and labour charges would be deposited to final payment. The applicant demanded the money but the same was not given and the applicant was beaten by the deceased. Due to this reason the applicant has been falsely implicated.
5. It is opposed by the learned A.G.A. and the learned Counsel for the complainant by submitting that the applicant is main accused. He has committed the murder of the deceased. The manner in which the deceased was murdered shows a high handedness of the applicant because all the sisters of the deceased were confined in a room. Thereafter, the murder was committed by way of strangulation and dead body of the deceased was hanged to give a impression that the deceased himself committed the suicide. The alleged occurrence was witnessed by the sisters of the deceased. The statements of the Km. Laxmi and Sonu have been recorded by the I.O. They have fully supported the prosecution story. The applicant has confessed before the police and at his pointing out ther rope used in the commission of the alleged offence was recovered. The deceased was poor person belonged to a scheduled caste He was aged about 16 years. He has not taken any loan from the applicant. He was bruetly murderdd only because he has refused to cut the varseem of the applicant. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by medical evidence. The deceased has received anti mortem injuries and the cause of death was strangulation. In such circumstances the applicant may not be released on bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and 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.
7. According this bail application is rejected.