Repeated offenders who commit crimes while on bail should not be granted bail, and the trial should be expedited. The nature of offenses and the general conduct of the accused are crucial factors in deciding on bail applications.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.

Heard Mr. A.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rupendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant/informant.

2. As per Mr. Mishra, the present applicant is in jail since 26.09.2018, in Case Crime No.302 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 404, 120-B & 34 I.P.C. Police Station- Baaghrai, District-Pratapgarh. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

3. As per the prosecution case, in the mid night of 11.12.2016 the complainant along with his brother Rajesh Singh, Dheeraj Singh, Sonu Singh, Poonam Singh, wife of Rajesh Singh, Harshvardhan Singh son of Rajesh Singh were returning to his home after attending an invitation in Tiwari Mahamadpur. When they reached at Kamsin Tiraha then the accused persons armed with fire arms and bombs attacked on them. It is further mentioned in the first information report that due to the firing Rajesh Singh died on spot and Dheeraj Singh and Sonu Singh received grievous injuries. It is also alleged in the first information report that during commission of crime the accused persons also looted a licensed pistol and cash of Rs.1,50,000/- and some papers of the deceased.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that on the complaint submitted by informant/complainant as many as 18 persons including the present applicant has been arrested.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that an unexplained delay of more than 14 hours in lodging of first information report renders the prosecution story wholly unreliable particularly when the informant alleges himself to be eye witness.

6. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the complainant, deceased Rajesh Singh and alleged injured Dheeraj Singh are notorious criminals and there is long criminal history to their credits. The aforesaid persons are also history-sheeters and due to their criminal activities, the deceased and alleged injured persons have been caused injuries by some unknown persons in dark hours of winter night and no one could identify the actual assailants. It is also submitted that the complainant was not accompanied with the deceased and alleged injured persons at the time of alleged incident and when he came to know about the aforesaid incident then he lodged a false first information report against those persons, with whom he is on inimical terms, leveling therein totally false and fabricated allegations, just to settle the score of enmity.

6. It is also submitted that neither the complainant nor the wife and son of the deceased have received any type of injury in the alleged incident. This fact itself creates doubt on their presence at the place of incident at the time of alleged incident. The alleged injured Sonu Singh has also denied the presence of complainant and the wife and son of deceased at the place of incident at the time of alleged incident. From perusal of the statements of alleged injured persons namely Dheeraj Singh and Sonu Singh, it is clear that the alleged incident took place in foggy winter night and due to the darkness and fog the accused persons could not be identified by them. From perusal of the statements of alleged injured persons, it is clear that their statements have been recorded after about one month of the alleged incident when they were medically fit.

7. It is also submitted that the injury reports of the alleged injured persons reveal that they were brought by Sanjay Singh and Kamlesh Pratap Singh for their medical examination not by the complainant, Poonam Singh and Harsh Vardhan Singh, who have claimed themselves to be the eye witnesses of the alleged incident. This fact itself creates doubt on the presence of complainant, Poonam Singh and Harsh Vardhan Singh at the place of incident at