Uma Yadav vs State of U.P.

B.K. Rathi, J.—The applicant has made a request for bail in Case Crime No. 694 of 1999, under Sections 302 and 506, I.P.C. police station Saidpur, district Ghazipur.

In brief the case of the prosecution is that on 24.9.1999 at about 8 a.m. the applicant and Babu alias Gautam, co-accused assaulted the victim by knife and accused Lallan Yadav fired several rounds of shots at the victim causing his death. The F.I.R. of the incident is promptly lodged at 9.10 a.m.

I have heard Sri R. N. Rai, learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

It is contended that the post-mortem report of the victim showed that as many as eleven injuries were caused to the victim, out of which injury Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are incised wounds which may be of knife. The knife has been assigned to two persons, the applicant and co-accused Babu alias Gautam. That the rest of the injuries are of fire-arm which have been caused by co-accused Lallan Yadav. It is further contended that in the post-mortem report, it has been mentioned that death has been due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante-mortem injuries No. 9 to 11. All these injuries are of fire-arm. That the knife injuries have not resulted in the death.

It is further contended that the main accused Lallan Yadav has already been enlarged on bail by learned Sessions Judge. That, therefore, the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity.

Considering the circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to bail. However, before parting with this matter it may be mentioned that the learned Sessions Judge has granted bail to co-accused, Lallan Yadav mentioning wrong facts thereby making out a ground for bail. Certified copy of the order of the learned Sessions Judge granting bail to Lallan Yadav has been produced. The material portion of the same is reproduced below:

Although the accused is named in the F.I.R. and he allegedly fired one round on the deceased causing injury to him, but the fact remains there that the injury was caused only in the arm and it could not be said that the same was sufficient for causing death. It is material to note that the other co-accused had given repeated knife blows to the deceased and resulted into his death but the accused-applicant Lallan Yadav did not repeat the fire to kill after he had caused only a fire-arm injury on the arm of the deceased. In this view of the matter, bail should be granted. The petition is allowed.

It has wrongly been mentioned in the order that the applicant (Lallan Yadav) fired only one round of shot and that he did not repeat the fire. He has wrongly mentioned that the fire-arm injuries have been caused on the arm only and it could not be said that the same was sufficient for causing death. As mentioned above, the death is the result of the fire-arm injuries and it is also against the facts that knife blows resulted in the death.

Therefore, it appears that learned Sessions Judge has granted bail to accused, Lallan Yadav by mentioning totally wrong facts. The State may move proper application for the cancellation of bail.

Let the applicant, Uma Yadav, involved in Case Crime No. 694 of 1999, under Sections 302 and 506, I.P.C. police station Saidpur, district Ghazipur, be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.

Let a copy of this order be also sent to the Hon''ble Administrative Judge, Ghazipur for information.