Point of Law:
While granting bail, the relevant considerations are:-(i) nature of seriousness of the offence; (ii) character of the evidence and circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; and (iii) likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice; (iv) the impact that his release may make on the prosecution witnesses, its impact on the society; and (v) likelihood of his tampering. No doubt, this list is not exhaustive. There are no hard and fast rules regarding grant or refusal of bail, each case has to be considered on its own merits. The matter always calls for judicious exercise of discretion by the Court.

JUDGMENT :

1. Sri Kamlendra Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the first informant filed an affidavit to which Sri Ajay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant did not propose to file any reply.

2. Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Kamlendra Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the informant and Sri R.K. Srivastava, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

3. This bail application has been filed by the applicant Gajendra Singh for releasing him on bail in Case Crime No.186 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504 and 34 I.P.C., P.S. Hathras Junction, district Hathras.

4. Sri Manish Tiwary, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged on 9.6.2018 at 21-45 hours in respect of the alleged incident of the same day at 20-00 hours. As per the F.I.R., on 9.6.2018 due to animosity out of the election of Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, 11 accused persons, armed with firearms came to the house of the first informant Rajkumar, started abusing and on protest they opened fire upon the first informant and his brothers Netra Pal and Pratap, who received fire arm injuries and died on spot, whereas the first informant was injured. He submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged with delay, of which there was no plausible explanation. The Investigating Officer prepared spot inspection report/memo mentioning that the corpse of deceased persons were found lying on the road, outside the house of the first informant. Inquest was done on the next day, as for want of light it could not be done on the same day. Nobody had seen the incident so as to ascertain as to who opened fire upon the deceased and by which weapon. The applicant has not been assigned any particular weapon. The F.I.R. was lodged against 11 persons but charge sheet was filed against only 4 persons, including the applicant. This belies the prosecution story. As per post mortem report cause of death is shock and hemorrhage, as a result of ante mortem firearm injuries, but he submitted that the injuries are of such a nature which could not be caused by a country-made pistol of 315 bore, recovered from the possession of the applicant as per the recovery memo. Such injuries could be caused by SBBL gun or 12 bore pistol, which were recovered from other accused, namely, Rajan Singh and Ajay Singh. The first and the second statements of the first informant, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. although supported the F.I.R. but being false cannot be considered. The scribe of the F.I.R. Anurag Sisodiya, on being asked as to how the first informant recognized the accused persons, replied “by voice and light of inverter”, whereas the inquest could not be done on the same day for want of light and therefore, the statement of the scribe under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was also not reliable. Other witnesses Devendra Singh, Hemlata and Himanshu are interested witnesses, being the family members of the first informant and as such their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. are also not reliable.

5. Learned Senior Counsel Sri Manish Tiwary has submitted that general allegations have been levelled against the applicant who has been falsely implicated. The coaccused Harendra from whose possession also recovery of country made pistol of 315 bore was made has been granted bail by this Court by order dated 13.12.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.43858 of 2018. The applicant is involved in one other Case Crime No.205 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Hathras Junction, district Hathras, in which he has been released on bail. The applicant is in jail since 10.6.2018. In case the applicant is granted bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. He has also informed that the trial has commenced and one witness PW-1 has been examined.

6. Per contra Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel submit