IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Dated: Nainital: the 25th day of February 2008 Criminal First Bail application no. 145 of 2008 Order on the bail application of accused person. CRIMINAL SIDE Pravesh @ Bittu S/o Sri Ayub, R/o village Khanja Kutubpur, Police Station-Laksar, District Haridwar. ……Applicant/appellant Versus State of Uttaranchal ….Opposite Party Arising out of case crime no. 291/2007 U/Ss, 302 I.P.C. Police Station Laksar, District Haridwar. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard, Ms. Krishi Shukla learned Counsel for the applicant/ accused and Sri M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the record. The prosecution case, in brief, is that he present accused/applicant Pravesh @ Bittu has fired at Zakr on 05.11.2007 at 4:45 p.m. at village Kutubpur, Police Station Laksar, district Haridwar. First Information Report of the said incident was lodged by the complainant Iddu S/o Ramjani on 05.11.2007 at 8:40 p.m. at police Station Laksar, district Haridwar. In the F.I.R. it was also averted that the deceased Zakir and others have committed murder of Dr. Ayub, i.e. the father of the present applicant, in the year 2001 in which they were sentenced to life imprisonment and now he in on bail and due to that enmity the present accused/applicant pravesh @ Bittu has fired at Zakir and due to the injuries caused by the applicant, the deceased Zakir has died on 06.11.2007 at 12:00 noon in the hospital. Postmortem of the deceased was conducted on 07.11.2007 at 2:10p.m. and in the postmortem a fire arm injury in the head of the deceased was shown. Learned Brief Holder Sri M.A. Khan has further submitted that in the postmortem report it is also shown that one pellet was detected in the middle of the brain and fire arm injures has been shown in the prostmortem report. He has further submitted that statements of the eye-witnesses were recorded by the Investigation Officer and in the statements recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigation Officer, the eye-witnesses, namely, Sri Sarfraj and Km. Rehan have also supported the prosecution case. He has further submitted that specific role has been assigned to the present accused/applicant and it has been shown that the applicant has fired at the deceased Zakir and due to the fire arm injuries caused by the applicant the deceased Zakir has died, which is proved by the postmortem report. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve bail at this stage. The bail application is, thus rejected. (Dharam Veer, J.) February 25, 2008; NCM`