The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, to determine the nature of the accused's act and its legal implications.

JUDGMENT :

1. The case is called out.

2. Learned counsel for the bail applicant, Sri Vaibhav Srivastava, Advocate assisted by Sri Suyesh Pradhan, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Ajay Kumar Singh Tomar, Advocate are physically present in the Court.

3. The present bail application is moved on behalf of accused-applicant Sri Krishna Rathor, involved in Case Crime No.511 of 2021, under Section 304 of the I.P.C., registered at Police Station Sandana, District Sitapur.

4. The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of bail plea of the accused-applicant by learned Special Judge, Sitapur vide order dated 11.01.2022.

5. Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have duly been exchanged between the contesting parties to the case, as such, the case is ripe for hearing.

6. Opening the argument, learned counsel for the bail applicant addresses the case as a case of harsh (celebratory) firing but peculiarly enough the firing is done by one inmate of the house in a tilak ceremony of another family member in enthusiasm of the ceremonial spirit. Daringly enough he opened the fire by reason of which a woman of the concerned family got seriously injured and ultimately died on spot. Another peculiarity of the fact lies in the first information report of the incident is not lodged by any of the family members but it was noticed by local police itself entered in G.D. of 07.12.2021. It is reported by the police officer that at about 07:30 P.M. when the tilak ceremony was going on the fire was made open in enthusiasm by accused-applicant causing hurt and fatal injuries to the woman i.e. the deceased victim namely Anju D/o Ramnath and wife of one Pradeep.

7. Learned counsel submitted that there was neither the intention to kill the deceased nor the pistol was aimed to fire on her, therefore, act of the accused-applicant was atmost of rash and negligence. He further added that not only the present accused-applicant but there were so many others also present in the ceremonial crowd who opened harsh (celebratory) firing in the same enthusiasm as shown by the present accused-applicant. Learned counsel further submitted that it is not established by the prosecution that only the present accused-applicant’s act was responsible for causing death of the deceased “Anju”.

8. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand protested the bail application quoting the statement of witnesses who are relatives and were gathered at the ceremonial place at the relevant time of incident particularly the statement of Smt. Shanti Devi i.e. mother of the deceased, impressing on the fact that she has confined the role of fatal firing causing the death of the deceased immediately on the spot to the present accused-applicant only.

9. Learned A.G.A. further quoted the first information report which was investigated and ultimately charge sheet was submitted wherein number of witnesses are named who were present on spot at the relevant time of incident and have unequivocally stated about the firing, however, some of them have not stated to have seen any particular person firing by whom, the fatal injuries occurred to the deceased “Anju”.

10. On the ground of aforesaid materials available on the case diary, learned A.G.A. submitted that offence is not only rash, negligent and irresponsible but also unmindful act with brutality in nature. However, any kind of previous enmity on the part of present accused-applicant with the family members of the deceased is not stated in the counter affidavit even criminal antecedent is not stated.

11. Learned counsel for the bail applicant submitted that the present accused-applicant is a government servant and his employment is the only means of livelihood for his entire family, as such, there is a question at this stage whether he should be given an opportunity to defend himself in the course of trial.

12. Hearing the learned counsel for the bail applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and after perusing materials available on record,