Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BRIJVEER SINGH versus STATE OF U.P.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Brijveer Singh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2206 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 4248 (17 October 2005)

 

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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

 Hon'ble M.C. Jain, J.

Hon'ble Vinod Prasad, J.

We have heard Sri Anurag Khanna, counsel  for the accused appellant Brijveer Singh on the prayer for bail during the pendency of the appeal. The A.G.A. has been heard in opposition. We have perused the impugned judgment as also the record which has been summoned before us.

               One Ilam Singh was done to death by shooting on 25.11.2000 at about 9 AM and the FIR was lodged by eyewitness Krishna Bala (daughter-in-law of the deceased) at 11.15 AM against the present appellant, his Sala Bittu and two unknown persons. They opened shots. One of the shots hit Ilam Singh and he died. The incident occurred when Ilam Singh, the informant Krishna Bala PW 1 and Sunita PW 2 (daughter-in-law of the deceased) were cutting sugarcane crop in their field. The arguments of the learned counsel for the accused appellant Brijveer Singh are two-fold. First, the FIR is anti-timed. Second, it was an improvement made at evidence stage that the shot killing Ilam Singh was attributed to the present appellant Brijveer Singh.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter. For an incident of 9 AM, the lodging of FIR at 11.15 AM was made within reasonable time and there is no solid material to back the contention of the FIR being anti-timed. So far as the second argument in support of bail prayer is concerned, it has come to be specified in the testimony of both the eyewitnesses Krishna Bala PW 1 and Sunita PW 2 that it was the shot opened by the present accused appellant Brijveer Singh which had hit the deceased. It is a fact that he received only one gunshot injury. As per the evidence, the motive was also on the part of the accused appellant Brijveer Singh to kill Ilam Singh as the latter with his two sons had been arraigned for the earlier murder of the father of the accused appellant Brijveer Singh.

The factum of four persons including the present appellant having opened shots does not entitle the accused appellant Brijveer Singh to bail when it has come to be specified in the evidence adduced in the court that the shot killing the victim was opened by him in this broad daylight incident. We do not think it proper to say anything further and would like the matter to rest here.

The prayer for bail of accused appellant Brijveer Singh is rejected.

        Dt:17.10.2005.

        Akn.Cr.A.2206-05.


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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