High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Anjoo Bajpai @ Ganjoo v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 18990 of 2006  RD-AH 16434 (20 September 2006)
court No. 47
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18990 of 2006
Anjoo Bajpai alias Ganjoo Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.
Heard Sri G.S.Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Rajendra Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri Rajiv Gupta, Sri Sharik Ahmad, Sri Roopak Chaube and Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged incident had taken place on 15.6.2006 at about 8.00 a.m. Its F.I.R. has been lodged on the same day at 9.15 a.m. it is said that the applicant armed with danda and remaining six co-accused persons were armed with country made pistols had entered into the shop of the deceased and discharged shots on the person of the deceased. The applicant also used danda blows in causing injury on the person of the deceased. Thereafter, firing was done towards the witnesses also but in that firing nobody received any injury. The deceased had received seven injuries cause by fire arm. The deceased has not received any other injury caused by danda or other weapon which falsify the implication of the applicant in the present case. The applicant was not having any motive to commit the alleged offence because there was a dispute in between the deceased and other co-accused persons. The applicant does not belong to the family of other co-accused persons. After receiving the injury the deceased was taken to the hospital where he died. According to the Post Mortem Examination Report no injury was caused by the applicant. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with the case of other co-accused persons who caused injury on the person of the deceased. The applicant is a man of peace loving, he is not a previous convict and there is no likelihood of his absconding and tempering with the evidence, therefore, he may be released on bail.
In reply of the above contention, it is submitted by the learned A.G.A. that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. The F.I.R. has been promptly lodged. The applicant is an associate of other co-accused. He was present at the place of occurrence and he was having a danda. He used danda blow which did not cause any injury. It is a case showing high-handedness of the applicant and other co-accused persons. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he may temper with the evidence.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail.
Let the applicant Anjoo Bajpai alias Ganjoo involved in case crime no. 350 of 2006 under Sections 147,148,149,307,302,352,504 and 506 I.P.C., and under section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act P.S. Kalyanpur
District Kanpur Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the condition that the applicant shall not temper with the evidence and he shall report to the court of C.M.M. concerned in the first week of each month till conclusion of the trial, to show his good behaviour and conduct.
In default of the above condition it shall be open to the learned C.M.M. Kanpur Nagar to cancel of bail of the applicnt.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.