Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The FIR in Crime No. 303/2016 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Guna has been filed along with the bail application. This FIR was lodged by one Vikash Agrawal and he has specifically stated that on 9/6/2016 at about 9:45 pm, he along with his cousin brother namely Satyam were sitting in his shop. Co-accused Vishnu Bhadoriya along with other persons came inside the shop and assaulted them as well as also caused damage to the shop. In the present case, the complainant has specifically mentioned that Satyam is his son. The son of his brother-in-law namely Vikash and his son were beaten by co-accused Vishnu Bhadoriya and with an intention to pressurize them to change their version in respect of that case, the applicant and other co-accused persons have committed this offence. Thus, it is clear that the son of the complainant was one of the victim in Crime No. 303/2016 registered by Police Station Kotwali, District Guna and the allegation made by the complainant that present offence has been committed only with an intention to deter the complainant and his family members from deposing against the accused persons in Crime No. 303/2016 appears to be correct. Thus, the submission made by the counsel for the applicant is factually incorrect and cannot be accepted.

The another submission made by the counsel for the applicant that in a case under Section 302 of IPC, he has placed the list of the witnesses and the name of the complainant or his son is not mentioned as a witness, therefore, it cannot be said that the offence has been committed because of that case.

So far as the list of the witnesses filed by the applicant is concerned, it is not clear that whether any relative or distant relative of the complainant has some connection with the said case or not. Even otherwise, in the present case, in the FIR, it is specifically mentioned that the complainant party was attacked by the accused persons to pressurize them to change their versions in the trial of Crime No. 303/2016, therefore, the list of witnesses in another criminal case has no relevance in the present case.

Thus, it is clear that while deciding the bail application, the allegations made against the accused also play important role. Where the offence is committed against the son of the complainant in the year 2016 and the applicant along with other co-accused persons, who are also accused in the said case, came to the house of the complainant and threatened him to change his version and when the complainant refused to do so, indiscriminate firing was done, it is clear that it is direct interference in the Justice Delivery System. Where the accused tried to win over the witnesses by muscle power so that they cannot narrate the truth before the trial Court then, the conduct of the accused has to be dealt with firmly.