Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. Respondent-State has filed status report and ASI Pyare Lal, PS Hatli, has also come present with the records.

.

Records perused and returned.

3. After having perused the record/status report, this Court finds that on 18.9.2021, deceased Ravi Kumar alias Panku was allegedly given beatings in the shop of person namely Krishan Chand by person namely Neetu alongwith his two friends, whose names are not known to him. Though, deceased Ravi Kumar alias Panku after being beaten by Neetu alongwith his friends, suffered injuries on his left eye and several parts of the body, but he chose to remain silent because on that day, neither he went to hospital nor lodged report to the police. However, on the next morning, he was taken to hospital by his mother, where police after having received information from hospital authorities, recorded the statement of above named deceased under Section 154 Cr.P.C, wherein he alleged that on 17.9.2021, at 9.00 PM, while he was in Bhambla Bazar, person namely Neetu alongwith his one friend, whose name is not known to him, but he recognize him, gave him beatings with iron rods, as a result of which, he suffered injuries on his left eye and several parts of the body. Deceased also alleged that above named Neetu and his friend also obstructed his path and gave him beatings with kicks, fists and iron rod. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, FIR detailed herein above, came to be lodged against the accused named in the FIR. Since investigation in the case is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from .

justice, but may also cause harm to the remaining prosecution evidence.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court finds some merit in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that at the time of recording his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C deceased never disclosed the name of the bail petitioner to the police because in that eventuality, police would have definitely recorded the name of the bail petitioner in the FIR at first instance, whereas in the case at hand, his name came to be recorded on the basis of statements made by PW-4 and her mother on 19.9.2021 i.e. after the death of the deceased. Deceased in his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C named accused Sansar Chand alias Neetu R/o Sulpur, but he never named other accused named in the FIR. However, he stated that he can recognize them, if brought before him. In his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C., deceased stated that on 17.09.2021, at 9.00 PM he was given beatings by person namely Neetu alongwith his friend, who is driver by profession in Bhamla Bazar, in the shop of PW-1, who while getting his statement recorded before the trial Court has turned hostile and nowhere supported the case of the prosecution.

7. However, record reveals that statements of PW4 and her mother under Section 161 were recorded on 19.9.2021 i.e. after the death of the deceased, who admittedly expired on 18.9.2021, in a hospital at Baldwara. As has been taken note hereinabove, initially deceased namely Ravi in his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C named only one person namely Neetu and he never disclosed names of other accused including the present bail petitioner as claimed by PW-4 in her statement recorded before the trial Court. It is only after recording of statements of PW4 and her mother, names of the accused including the present bail petitioner came to be inserted in the FIR.

As has been taken note hereinabove, sole eye witness Sh. Krishan .

Chand (PW1) has not supported the case of the prosecution. He specifically denied factum with regard to beatings, if any, given by the accused named in the FIR to the deceased Ravi Kumar.

Cross-examination conducted upon this witness by the public prosecutor nowhere suggests that prosecution was able to extract something contrary to what this witness stated in the examination in chief. Apart from above, another material prosecution witness PW4 Sapna stated before the court below that after having received information with regard to beatings, she reached the hospital at Baldwara and in front of them, her deceased brother disclosed to the police the name of all the accused including the present bail petitioner, but she also admitted that her statement under Section 161 was recorded at her village Kanjia on 19.9.2021. Even if aforesaid version put forth by PW-4 is presumed to be correct, there is no explanation that why police failed to array all the accused named by deceased in the FIR at the first instance because admittedly FIR at the first instance came to be recorded on the basis of statement made by the deceased under Section 154 Cr.PC.