CRLA/530/2022
2023 Latest Caselaw 2301 UK

               Office Notes,
              reports, orders
SL.          or proceedings or
      Date                                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No            directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures

                                 IA/3/2023 (Bail Application)
                                 In
                                 CRLA No.530 of 2022
                                 Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Arvind Vashishtha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Nidhi Thapa, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant.

Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State.

The appellant of Criminal Appeal No.530 of 2022, i.e. Brijesh has been convicted by the judgment of 16.11.2022 / 21.11.2022, as it was rendered by the Court of the 1st Additional District and Session Judge, Haridwar in Sessions Trial No.176 of 2015, "State Vs. Prayash and Others".

So far as the appellant is concerned, if the narration of the incident, which has chanced on 20.08.2014, is taken into consideration, in fact, he was the main person, who has been assigned with the role of having fired upon Virendra by country- made pistol.

Initially, an attempt for the composition of offence was made but that was declined, on the ground, that the principal role which has been assigned for commission of the offence under Section 307 of the IPC has been attributed to the present applicant and, particularly, more when the offence committed by him of an assault made by the country-made pistol is read with in co-relation to a medical report submitted by the Doctor, which has to be read in the context of the statement as recorded by PW1, who has submitted that when the victim was brought to the hospital and he was medically examined, he was in an injured condition bleeding profusely, and on his left back, the injury was found to be about 13x9 c.m. area and at different places, the pellets were found. Apart from the fact, that the appellant was the main assailant and the injuries too, which were caused upon the victim, was on the left back, which was taken to be on a vital part of the body because the gunshot, which injured the victim on the higher upper side of the left back, it would have been fatal to his life.

Owing to the aforesaid fact, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. His bail application is, accordingly, rejected.

In fact, an attempt has been made by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant to mislead the Court. The reason being that, the bail application was being pursued for seeking his release on bail, for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC and the reference which was made by the counsel to the judgment was confined to the implications as to how section 320 of the Cr.P.C., would be considered to be made applicable for the purposes of mitigating an offence depending upon the circumstances of each and every case, which would be absolutely an alien issue.

The principle ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment of Murali Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police as reported in (2021) 1 SCC 726, he has made reference to paragraph no.12 of the judgment. In fact, paragraph no.12, of the judgment is taken into consideration. It is exclusively on the backdrop as to under what circumstances, the Application under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. has to be considered and what backdrop impact of the same would have upon the mind of the Court while dealing with the application under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C.

The factors, laid therein, which are required to be considered for considering the compounding application under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be equated and borrowed to be considered for purpose of considering the bail itself, which is to be decided depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case based upon which the appellant has been convicted.

Hence, so far as the present case is concerned, paragraph no.12 has got no relevance and its application, so far as consideration of the bail application is concerned.

Hence, I do not find that this judgment of Murali (supra), would be of any help to the present applicant for pressing his bail application qua Brijesh - the appellant of Criminal Appeal No.530 of 2022.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 17.08.2023 Sukhbant