JUDGMENT
Vinod Prasad, J.
1. Alok Pandey @ Godli has filed this bail application in crime No. 1 of 06, under Sections 302, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Naini, District Allahabad.
2. The short narration of allegations against the applicant are that the informant Jai Prakash Yadav is a resident of house No. 124/6 Labour Colony, Naini, Allahabad. On the occasion of new year Umesh Shukla, Village Pradhan had organized a feast of Bati Chokha in the compound of one Musafir Sharma at l95/4 A Labour Colony, Naini, Allahabad. The said feast was attended to by many neighbors. At the time of meal preparation Om Prakash Yadav brother of the informant Jai Prakash Yadav demanded the motorcycle from Alok Pandey @ Goldi the present applicant which was refused by Goldi after some tiradic alterations which was pacified by the people present on the spot. Goldi had left the place after the said alteration and he, thereafter, returned after an hour at about 10.10 AM. By that time Om Prakash Yadav, the brother of informant had taken the meal and was standing on the road in front of
Hanuman Tample. Goldi @ Alok Pandey, applicant was armed with a licensee pistol and he vetuparising the brother of informant started firing at him as a result of which the brother of the informant Om Prakash Yadav sustained bullet injuries on the chest and fell down. After hearing the shots, the informant and others rushed to the shot and tried to apprehend Goldi, but he made his escape good firing in the air. The informant Jai Prakash Yadav along with Umesh Shukla (Pradhan), Vinod Rai and Shiva Yadav dumped his brother into the car and was bringing him to Jeevan Jyoti Hospital Allahabad for treatment when in the midway injured lost his life. Putting his corpse in Jeevan Jyoti Hospital the informant went to the Police Station Naini and lodged a F.I.R. on 5.1.2006 at 12.35 AM in night which was registered as crime number 1 of 2006, under Sections 302/504 I.P.C. The incident, as is mentioned was dated 4.1.2006 at 10.10 PM. The inquest of the deceased was conducted at 1.35 AM in Jeevan Jyoti Hospital and later on his autopsy was performed on 5.1.2006 at 2.40 PM. The Postmortem report indicates 4 injuries on the body of the deceased.
3. I have heard Shri J.S. Sengar, Learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri Mukeem Ahmad, Learned Counsel for the informant and the learned AGA in opposition.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicant contended that the prosecution case is absolutely false and the genuineness of the incident and the manner has been suppressed by the prosecution. He contended that in this case the applicant also sustained gun shot injuries for which no explanation has been
afford by the prosecution. He further contended that it is the prosecution case that at the pointing out by the applicant, the weapon of assault was taken out
buried in the sand soil from the place of the incident itself. In respect of this contention, he invited the attention of the Court at the spot inspection note papered by the I.O. (annexure No. 9 to this bail application) in which “O” is the place where the heap of sand of 2 feet is shown and “D” is the place from where the pistol was buried inside the sand was recovered. “1,2,3,” are the places where the empties of the pistol had been recovered. “B” is the place from where the shooting was made and “A” is the place where the deceased was standing and had sustained injury. He contended that if the witnesses had seen the incident and if the prosecution version is correct the pistol could not have been unearthed from the sand near the place of shooting. For his first contention that applicant has also sustained injuries he invited the attention of the Court on the G.D. entry where it is mentioned that Ramesh Chandra Pandey and Smt. Vimla Pandey the parents of the applicant accused brought the applicant Alok Pandey @ Goldi in an injured condition and injured accused applicant was sent for medical examination through constable 0976, Pawan Tiwari and constable 1046 Manoj Kumar Giri after preparation of Chitthi Majroobi (request of medical examination) to Beli Hospital, Allahabad. He also invited the attention of the Court on the G.D. entry of 11.50 PM (annexure No. 5) which is recording of wireless massage which also mentioned that it was informed on wireless that a programme was going on in the precinct of Musafir Sharma and 5-7 boys were fighting each other all of sudden, a boy fell down and he had received a gun shot injury whose name is Om Prakash Yadav. While on his way to the hospital, he died in the way and Alok Pandey
@ Galdi sustained gun shot injury in his leg. Learned Counsel for the applicant further contended that the pistol recovered from the possession of the applicant was not sent to ballastics expert for examination. He further contended that it was the parents of the applicant who took the applicant to the police station before lodging of the FIR and it was through police that his medical examination was got done. He further submitted that the medical report of the applicant indicates that he has received a punctured wound 6cmx1cm above the back of left joint on the back of thigh with bleeding present and he also sustained a lacerated wound in front and lateral part of left thigh 6cmxl cm above left knee joint with bleeding present and also a contusion 6cmxlcm on left side of forehead. The medical report also indicates that the applicant was medically examined on 5.1.06 at 12.48 AM in night.
5. Learned AGA as well as Learned Counsel for the informant on the other hand contended that it was the applicant who shot dead the deceased and there was an eye-witness account of the incident as the informant and the others reached on the spot after hearing the gun firing and had seen the present applicant armed with a pistol. He further submitted that the applicant got his injuries manufactured and subsequently, he also put the pistol in the sand to saved his skin. They also contended that the postmortem report supports the prosecution version.
6. I have considered the above contention raised at the bar. The AGA has received instructions on the bail application. In paragraph 8 of the bail application, it is averred that there was indiscriminate firing by a known assailants because of enmity with Umesh Shukla on whose behest the feast was going on and in that shooting the applicant and the deceased sustained injuries. It is also averred in the said paragraph 8 that the applicant was taken to the police station by his parents and was send for medical examination along with the constable with Chitthi Majroobi and the G.D. entry in that respect is filed as annexure 4 to the affidavit. The said paragraph is replied by the I.O. in his instructions where he has admitted that the applicant has also sustained injury in the incident and he was brought to the police station by his parents prior to lodging the FIR and was sent to the hospital for medical examination but after the medical examination he did not returned to the police station. In paragraph 9 of the bail application, it is averred that the applicant had received firearm injuries on his leg which facts has also not been denied by the I.O. in his instructions vide para 9 of the comment sent by him. Vide para 10 of the comments by the I.O., it is admitted that the contents of paragraph 10 of the bail application are Correct which contains the averment regarding entries of G.D. No. 4 and also mentioned the averment that FIR was lodged suppressing the injuries of the applicant. Vide paragraph 18 of the comments sent by the I.O. the contention of the counsel for the applicant has been affirmed that the applicant had come to police station and was sent for medical examination. It is also admitted vide para 19 of the comment sent by the I.O. in reply to paragraph 19 of the bail application that on 5.1.06 the following morning of the incident the pistol was recovered from the heap of sand from the place of the incident itself.
7. Without adverting further over the merits of the matter, looking to the peculiar evidence of this case and also for no explanation of the injury of the applicant and admission of his going to the police station along with his parents prior to lodging of the FIR, and also the recovery of his pistol from the place of the incident burried in the sand the very next day of the incident that I considered it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.
8. Let the applicant Alok Pandey @ Goldi involved in crime No. 1 of 2006, under Sections 302, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Naini, District Allahabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Allahabad on the following condition:
1. That the applicant will furnished a personal bond of Rs. 1 lakh and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Allahabad. One of the two sureties will be his near relatives.
2. That the applicant will report to the police station concerned once in a month at date and time to be fixed by Officer In-charge of the police station concerned.
3. That the applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and will not abscond.
4. That the applicant will co-operate with the trial and will not seek any unnecessary and uncalled for adjournment.
5. That the applicant will not leave the District Allahabad without prior permission of the concerned Court and prior intimation to the police station concerned.