Allahabad High Court
Pappu vs State Of U.P. on 4 May, 2016
Bench: Abhai Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10819 of 2016
Applicant :- Pappu
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. Akhilesh Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Abhai Kumar, J.
Counter affidavit filed today, on behalf of the State, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
As per prosecution version, on 01.11.2014, the complainant Smt. Gyan Devi lodged an F.I.R with the assertion that on the same day his brother Amit Pal, husband Munna Lal were present near by the 'khokha' situated before her residence, then at about 7:00 p.m. Bhura, his mother Smt. Reshma and Papu (accused ? applicant) alongwith Malikhan Singh, reached there and asked the complaint to give Rs. 1 lac for settling mater of kidnapping of her daughter by way of compromise. When Amit Pal refused to do so, Reshma Devi exhorted to kill. On this, Bhura and Pappu and Malikhan Singh opened fired indiscriminately with their respective country-made pistols on Amit Pal and on raising alarm all the accused persons escaped from the place of occurrence. When the injured Amit Pal was being taken to the hospital, he died on the way before reaching the hospital.
Learned counsel for the accused applicant contended that only two fire arm injury are on the part of the deceased, whereas three persons are said to have been fired indiscriminately upon the deceased. Second contention is regarding motive and it is argued that a case against Munna Lal was lodged by brother of co-accused Bhura @ Bure and in that case it was alleged that sister of Bhura was abducted by Munna lal and others, no threat for compromise would have given by the complainant side who are complainant in other case. Third point is regarding the statement of Munna Lal, who was said to have present at the time of incident recorded after 36 days. It is not clear as to who fired causing fatal injury to the deceased.
Seen the facts contended by learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that applicant is in jail since 22.12.2014, bail of accused applicant is allowed.
Learned A.G.A for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material brought on record, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I think it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant ? Pappu, involved in Case Crime No. 375 of 2014, under Section 302 I.P.C, Police Station Makkhanpur, District Firozabad,, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 4.5.2016
Vinod.
