JUDGMENT Ravindra Singh, J.
1. Heard Sri Vashistha Tiwari learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.
2. From the perusal of the record it reveals that in the present case the alleged occurrence has taken place on 2,9.2004,in which it was alleged that co-accused Sunil and applicant Sonu had taken a loan of Rs. 2000/- each from Smt Radha Rani the mother of the first informant prior to six months to the alleged occurrence, but he same amount was not returned by them on demand of the first informant and her mother. The applicant and co-accused Sunil became annoyed and felt insult when the demand of return of the above loan was placed publicly before them, On the date of alleged occurrence at about 2.15 p.m. the applicant and co-accused Sunil surrounded the injured Smt Radha Rani and discharged five or six shots by their firearms with an intention to commit her murder. Consequently, she received injuries and fell down. The first informant and witness Vinod escaped their life by running away from there. The injured was admitted in the hospital from where she was referred to Aligarh. The medical examination report shows that injured had received nine injuries caused by firearms, in which injuries No. 1, 4, 6 and 7 were grievous in nature and some of the injuries were on vital parts of the body. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by medical evidence. The F.I.R. was promptly lodged. The witnesses were present at the alleged occurrence.
3. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find that it is not a fit case for bail at this stage.
4. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected at this stage.