Puran Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 1163 UK

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            Bail Application (IA No.1 of 2023)
                            In
             Criminal Appeal No.345 of 2021


Puran Singh                                    ........Appellant

                             Versus

State of Uttarakhand                        ........Respondent

Present:-
      Mr. Mukul Singh Dangi, Advocate for the appellant.
      Mr. V.K. Gemini, Deputy Advocate General for the State.

Coram:     Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Instant appeal is preferred against the

judgment and order dated 21.08.2021, passed in

Sessions Trial No.86 of 2016, State vs. Puran Singh &

another, by the court of Fifth Additional Sessions Judge,

Dehradun. By the impugned judgment and order, the

appellant has been convicted and sentenced under

Sections 302 and 109 of IPC. The appellant seeks bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the

bail application and perused the record.

3. According to the prosecution case, on

26.10.2015, at about 6:13 in the evening, the appellant

hit the deceased with a sharp edged weapon, due to

which he died.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would

submit that appellant has been falsely implicated because

of enmity in the family. The presence of PW1-Geeta

Topwal and PW2-Mohan Singh at the scene of occurrence

is much doubtful. PW21-Chaman Singh who is the driver

in the hospital had stated about a memo, which was given

from the hospital to the police, in which it was recorded

earlier that the deceased was brought dead in a road

accident and he has stated that "in a road accident" was

subsequently deleted. He would also indicate that

according to the witnesses, the appellant hit once on the

deceased, whereas the post-mortem report reveals that

there were as many as nine injuries.

5. Learned State Counsel would submit that it is

a case of direct evidence. PW1-Geeta Topwal and PW2-

Mohan Singh both have seen the appellant hitting the

deceased. The weapon of offence was recovered at the

instance of the appellant. The Forensic Science

Laboratory report detected blood on it.

6. It is a stage of bail, much of the discussion is

not expected of. To the extent, it is necessary the matter

is being examined.

7. According to the prosecution, the

deceased had a small shop of eatables near his house.

The deceased was helped by PW2 Mohan Singh. PW2

Mohan Singh has stated that he had witnessed the

incident. He has also stated that PW1 -Geeta Topwal, the

wife of the deceased, had also reached at the spot and she

had also seen the appellant running away from the place

of occurrence.

8. In the FIR, the informant, who is PW1-Geeta

Topwal has raised suspicion on the appellant. It writes, "I

doubt the complicity of the brother of my Jethani (Sister-

in-law)". At the time of hearing of the appeal, perhaps, it

would find deliberation as to why the FIR only doubts the

complicity of the appellant, when PW1-Geeta Topwal and

PW2-Mohan Singh both had seen the appellant at the

place of occurrence.

9. PW21-Chaman Singh is the driver of the

hospital. He had given a memo to the police station. In

the memo, initially it was recorded that after a road

accident, the patient was brought dead in the hospital.

PW21 has admitted that subsequently, "in a road

accident" has been deleted from it. Why is it so?

10. According to PW2-Mohan Singh, as soon the

appellant hit the deceased, he raised alarm and then the

appellant ran away. Does it mean that one blow was

given? If it is so, how were there nine injuries on the

deceased?

11. Having considered, this Court is of the view

that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail, during

the pendency of the appeal. Accordingly, the Bail

Application deserves to be allowed.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. The execution of sentence, appealed against,

shall remain in abeyance during pendency of this appeal.

Let the appellant be released on bail, on his executing a

personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each

of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court

concerned.

14. List this matter on 13.07.2023.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) (Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 27.04.2023 AK