Ram Chhail (In Jail) vs State of U.P.

Shiv Shanker, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A and perused the record.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that seven persons have been nominated in the F.I.R. including the present applicant. All the seven persons have been attributed the role to commit murder of the deceased by causing knives injuries. During the course of investigation, the statement of Smt. Santosh, wife of the deceased, was recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she has stated that deceased was caught hold by co-accused persons namely Azad, Roshan and Pappu who have been enlarged on bail. It is further contended that time of death of the deceased has not been mentioned in the Form No. 13 at page No. 20 of the bail application. The semi digested food were found in the stomach of the deceased. This shows that no blood was found at the place of occurrence which shows that he was murdered out side the village by some other persons and there is no any eye evidence of this case. This incident has not been done in the village. It is further contended that C.M.O. has already been issued certificate in the year 2004. Therefore, the applicant is 45% disabled person. Therefore, he could not cause injury on the body of the deceased. There is no criminal history against the present applicant.

This incident has taken place on 18.9.2006 at 12.00 Noon and the F.I.R. was lodged on 18.9.2006 at 2.45 P.M. wherein it has been stated that the role of all the seven persons including the present applicant were attributed to assault and inflict knives injuries on the body of Tejpal near the house of Prakash. Consequently, he died on the spot due to sustaining injuries. During the course of investigation me role has been assigned by Smt. Santosh wife of the deceased Tejpal that the present applicant along with co-accused Hawa Sing, Ramchhail, Jugmendra and Prakash committed the murder of the deceased by causing knives injuries while the role of the other three co-accused persons namely Azad, Pappu and Roshan have been shown of catching hold of the deceased. The prosecution version is supported with the post mortem report of the deceased that eight ante mortem injuries caused by sharp edged weapon were found on the dead body of the deceased. The F.I.R. has also been lodged within 2.15 P.M. after covering the distance of 12 kilometers. In such circumstances, there is no delay in lodging the F.I.R. This is the case of direct evidence and a broad day light.

This incident had allegedly taken place in the street where the persons come and go. Therefore, it is liable to be deemed that the blood falling down on the ground has disappeared due to coming and going of the villagers after incident. In absence of blood stained earth from the place of incident, the place of incident cannot be doubted. Contents of stomach cannot determine the time of incident. The C.M.O. certificate only reveals that he is 45% disabled persons but it is not liable to be deemed at this stage that he could not participate in committing such crime with the other co-accused persons. The motive is also established in the case.

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case I do not find any force in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the applicant. Therefore, the bail application of the present applicant is liable to be rejected.

Consequently, the bail application of the present applicant is hereby rejected.