Bail granted to applicant accused of attempted murder and other offenses under Sections 307, 352, 504, 506 IPC. Court relied on unreliable medical report, inconsistencies in victim's statement, and release of co-accused to find it a fit case for bail.
Applicant released on personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to standard bail conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4775 of 2021
Applicant :- Bhorik Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Kant Srivastava,Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma,Pradeep Chauhan,Renu Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Azaz Ahmad,Sharad Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1.Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Shiva Kant Srivastava and Shri Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri D.K. Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Sharad Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 130 of 2020, under Sections 307, 352, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Gambhirpur, District Azamgarh.
3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged against nine named accused persons, including the applicant, alleging that all the accused persons carrying pistols and country made pistols in their hands had chased her husband while he was returning after easing himself on 08-082020 at about 07:30 PM. The informant alleged that the applicant had fired a shot towards her husband, which had hit him in his mouth and jaw. She further stated that her husband had narrated the event after regaining consciousness in the hospital. She also alleged that a dispute is going on between the accused persons and the informant regarding some property.
4.The injured was medically examined by a Doctor on 08-082020 but the medical examination report prepared on a plain paper does not contain the name of the hospital or any seal of the Doctor. The medical examination report mentions an ‘Entry wound size 0.5 cm X 0.5 cm at left side face 2.5 cm medial to left ear tragus margin everted , bleeding present tattooing present.......(2) Exit wound size 0.5 cm X 0.5 cm at rt. side face 2 cm medial to rt. Ear tragus margin inverted bleeding present tattooing present...”
5.During investigation, the police recorded statement of the injured Ramchandra Prajapati on 21-08-2020, wherein he stated that the accused persons had fired a gunshot towards him from behind. He stated that the first shot was fired by the applicant Bhorik Yadav and the other co-accused persons were with him. He fell down after being hit by the gunshot. He stated that the
accused persons ran away towards the west and somehow the injured reached home and narrated the entire incident to his mother Smt. Subhawati Devi and his wife Urmila Devi. Thereafter, a categorical question was put to the injured as to whether it was dark at the time of the incident, to which he replied it was hazy but I could recognise. In reply to a question whether he was shot from behind, he said yes, he had been shot from behind. The injured was asked when he was shot from behind, how he suffered a injury in his jaw. He stated that the first shot was fired from behind which missed him and after hearing the gunshot he turned back then the applicant shot him in his jaw.
released on bail in the present case.
11.Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and keeping in view the facts that the medical examination report of the injured has been prepared on a plain paper, it does not bear the name of the hospital or designation of the Doctor, it mentions ‘everted entry wound' and 'inverted exit wound'; that in the F.I.R. lodged by the injured's wife, she has stated that her husband had narrated the incident after regaining consciousness in the hospital whereas in the statement of the injured recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. he stated that immediately after the incident he reached home and narrated the incident to his mother and his wife and also keeping into consideration the fact that in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the injured had stated that the first shot had been fired by the Bhorik Yadav from behind and the first shot had missed him and also it was a hazy at the time of the incident and also considering the fact that all the other co-accused persons have already been released on bail, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
12.The bail application is accordingly allowed.
13.Let the applicant - Bhorik Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No.130 of 2020, under Sections 307, 352, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Gambhirpur, District Azamgarh on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
14.In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application bail
before this Court seeking cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 22.8.2022 pks
Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.08.24 16:34:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite allegations of using weapons and a pending investigation.
6 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhorik Yadav
State of U.P.
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
