High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Nanhey Pal @ Nanhey v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 2904 of 2005  RD-AH 1260 (18 January 2006)
Court No. 19
Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 2904 of 2005
Nanhey Pal @ Nanhey .....Vs.....State of U.P.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh, J.
Counter affidavit has been filed today. Let it be taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and also the learned A.G.A.
The applicant is involved in case crime No. 45 of 2003, for the offences under Sections 304,452 IPC, Police Station Kalan District Shahjahanpur.
It is alleged that on 15.3.2003 at about 3.00 a.m. accused Nanhey pal along with his one companion ( subsequently this name appeared Anik Pal) entered into the house of the complainant and started dragging away Smt. Maharani the daughter of complainant. She raised alarm whereupon complainant son Ajay Pal (deceased) came and inflected a lathi blow upon the accused. Then other accused fired at the right arm of the complainant son who succumbed to his injury while going to the hospital. In the post mortem one fire arm wound of entry was found in the right arm which was found to be the cause of death.
In respect of genuineness of the prosecution case and the proposed evidence as also the involvement of the accused it was emphasized that had complainant seen the alleged occurrence in the alleged manner, he would have certainly named the accused specifically who fired at his son but in the F.I.R. he has simply mentioned that the other accused had fired at his son. It was also pointed out that there is delay in lodging of the F.I.R. The attention of the Court was drawn towards para 9 of the affidavit also which has not been specifically controvertered that the complainant filed an affidavit subsequently before the S.P. Shahjahanpur and added four new names Jasveer, Ranveer, Jagveer and Awadhesh Yadav. Further travelling beyond the F.I.R., the complainant also added in this affidavit that his daughter was also raped by Jasveer and when complainant son gave a lathi blow to one of the accused namely Jasveer then accused Ramveer fired at him causing an injury at right arm which resulted in his death. It was pointed out that applicant Nanhey Pal has not been specifically assigned the role of firing. The sole fire arm injury is also not on the vital part of the deceased and hence it cannot be said to be sufficient to make out an offences under Section 302 I.P.C.
The bail was, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A.
The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction of the Court regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered.
In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration some of the arguments advanced on behalf of the applicant in respect of the points discussed herein above, significantly it being an incident of night and absence of assignment of specific role of making single shot by the applicant, without prejudice to the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.