Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Raj Kumar v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 22533 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 20929 (12 December 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).



Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 22533 of 2006

Raj Kumar.....Vs......State of U.P.


Hon'ble Ravindra Singh, J.

This application has been filed by the applicant  Raj Kumar with a prayer that he may be released on bail in case crime no. 437 of 2005, under 302, 307and 452 I.P.C., P.S. Chhapar, District Muzaffarnagar.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by Sri Vinod on 15.11.2005 at 8.45 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 15.11.2005 at about 7.00 p.m. The distance of the police station was about 8 kms from the alleged place of occurrence. The F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant and 3 other accused persons alleging therein that about 2 ½  years prior the alleged incident co-accused Jaipal Fauji and   his sons discharged the shots at Ramesh, the eldest brother of the first informant, its F.I.R. was lodged by Omveer the elder brother of the first informant against the Jaipal and others under Section 307 I.P.C., this case was pending in the court, but co-accused Jaipal and his sons were pressurising Ramesh for entering into compromise, but the same was refused by Ramesh. The co-accused Jaipal and his sons were extending threats continuously. On 15.11.2005 at about 7.00 p.m the first informant, his mother Smt Sona Devi, his Bhabhi Smt Santosh, Vaishali and his brother Omveer and Smt Rajesh were present at their house then the applicant, co-accused Jaipal, Rajpal and Rampal having country made pistols entered into the house of the first informant and at the exhortation of the co-accused Jaipal all the four accused discharged the shots by their country made pistols towards Omveer and his wife Smt Rajesh who received injuries. Consequently, Omveer died on the spot, the injured Smt Rajesh was taken to the District Hospital where she succumbed to her injuries during treatment. One Gaurav has also received firearm injuries in the said incident, later on he also succumbed to his injuries in  Medical College, Meerut. According to the post mortem examination reports the deceased Omveer had received one lacerated wound 5 cm x 4 cm x chest cavity deep, from this wound 11 metallic pellets, one plastic cork were recovered and the deceased Smt Rajesh had received 2 ante mortem injuries and from her injuries metallic pellets were recovered, but the post mortem report of Gaurav has not been filed along with this application

 Heard Sri P.N. Mishra, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Apul Mishra learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri V.P. Srivastava Senior Advocate assisted by Sri A.S. Dubey learned counsel for the complainant.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case the applicant, his all brothers and his father have been implicated. The applicant had a fracture on his leg and he was not able to walk. The total injuries received by the deceased were 3 in number which could not be caused by more than three persons. In the present case the role of firing is assigned to 4 persons. The applicant was bed ridden for nearly a year, his participation in the present case is highly doubtful. The applicant is not having any criminal antecedent He is in jail for the last 9 months. He is innocent person; therefore, he may be released on bail.

In reply of the above contention the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the complainant submit that the deceased, injured, first informant and accused persons are belonging to the same family. The alleged occurrence had taken place only because the deceased Omveer and Ramesh, the brother of the first informant, have refused to enter into compromise in an earlier case pending against the co-accused Jaipal and other under Section 307 I.P.C. In the present case the deceased Omveer, his wife Smt Rajesh and his son Gaurav have been murdered. They were witnesses in the above-mentioned case under Section 307 I.P.C. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. The F.I.R. was promptly lodged. The gravity of the offence is too much and the applicant was not bed ridden on the date of alleged occurrence, he was freely moving from one place to another place and he actually participated in the present case. In case he is released on basil he shall tamper with the evidence, therefore, he may not be released on bail.

      Considering the facts, circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant and considering the gravity of the offence in which 3 persons have been done to death and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is not entitled for bail, therefore, the prayer for bail is refused.

         Accordingly, the bail application is rejected

Dated: 12.12.2006




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.