Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1313 of 2008 18.12.2008 Present: Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General for the respondent. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 332 of 2008 dated 29.10.2008 registered at Police Station, Manali, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh for offences punishable under sections 302, 201 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 25, 54 and 59 of the Indian Arms Act. Mr. Ajay Chandel, Advocate has strenuously argued that his client is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case by the police. His precise submission is that there was no eye witness to the incident dated 27.10.2008 and his client is a local person and there are no chances of his absconding. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner had earlier approached the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu seeking bail. The application was instituted on 18.11.2008 and the same was decided on 28.11.2008. It is evident from the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge that present petitioner was on the spot on 27.10.2008. Moti Ram fired on Bhag Chand. The body of Bhag Chand was dumped in the ditch. The present petitioner cleaned the rifle of Moti Ram to eliminate the evidence. The investigation is at the threshold and the possibility of evidence being tampered by the petitioner cannot be ruled out. Mr. Kuber was also present on the spot and his statement has also been recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mr. Ajay Chandel has also failed to pin point any subsequent development which might have taken place between 28.11.2008 till date. Accordingly the petitioner has not made out any case for his release on bail In view of the observations made hereinabove, there is no force in the application and the same is dismissed. The observations made in this order are for the disposal of this application and the same shall not be treated as an expression/opinion on the merits of the case. (Rajiv Sharma), J. December 18, 2008. *awasthi