Monu Kumar @ Monu v. State

1. This is an application for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in FIRNo.75/2012 P.S. Gazipur.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has no role in the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are that he along with co-accused persons has committed an offence punishable under Section 302/308/323/34 IPG. Learned counsel has submitted that in the FIR the role assigned to the petitioner is catching hold of the deceased i.e. Kanchhid at the time of incident. The other allegations against him are that he had hit the brother of deceased on his head with a bat. It is stated that as per FIR the main role of stabbing has been assigned to Babu who is alleged to have taken out knife from his pocket and had stabbed in the stomach ofKanchhid. It is submitted BAIL APPLN. 1234/2013 2013:DHC:6903 that the main role has been assigned to Babu who is the brother of the present petitioner. It is further submitted that at the time of alleged occurrence petitioner was 18 years and 3 months old and was a 12^^ class student. It is submitted thathe hastakenthe 12^ class examination from the Jail. The petitioner is in J.C. since 25.2.2012. The material witnesses have already been examined. It is further submitted that the independent witnesses i.e. Ramesh Chand PW[9] and Sheela PW14 who are the immediate neighbours and in whose presence the alleged incident had taken place have denied in the evidence even the role assigned to the petitioner i.e. catching hold of the victim at the time of incident. It is stated that the other material witnesses of the prosecution are the family members of the deceased i.e. his mother, son and wife. It is submittedthat mother of deceased i.e. Premwati PWll has also not deposed about the alleged role of the petitioner in the evidence. It is submitted that even the complainant Rahul PW[2] in crossexaminationhad initially statedthat only Babu was there and he had stabbed his father and thereafter he changed his statement and stated that the present petitioner and two others had caughthold of his father. It is submitted that the wife of deceased has already been examined. It is submitted that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined and there is no threat that the petitioner will tamper with prosecution evidence in any marmer. It is prayed that petitioner who in custody for the past 1 year and 7 months be released on bail.

3. Learned APP has opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR. It is submitted that even if the independent witnesses - Sheela PW14, Ramesh Chand PW[9] have not supported the case BAIL APPLN. 1234/2013 Page 2 of[3] of the prosecution. There are other witnesses i.e. son and wife of deceased who have clearly supported the case of prosecution. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has committeda heinous crime and is not entitled for bail.

4. I have considered the submissions made as well as gone through the material on record including the evidence of material PWs which has been annexed with the bail application. It will not be appropriate to appreciate the evidence at this stage. It is not denied by the learned APP that the petitioner at the time ofincident was a 12^^ class student and his age was 18 years and 3 months. He is also in J.C. for the past 20 months. The role assigned to him is catching hold of the deceased at the time of incident and hitting on the head of the injured Sanjay with a bat. The material witnesses have already been examined in this case.

5. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, the petitioner is admitted to bail on furnishing a bail bond of ^20,000/- with surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court. The petitioner and family of deceased live in the same locality. It is clarified that the petitioner shall not try to contact the family of the deceased in any manner. In case he does so, the State will be at liberty to apply for cancellation ofbail. Copy of this order be sent to petitioner in Jail through Jail Superintendent.

VEENA BIRBAL, J