The learned Judge has also numbered that the six witnesses examined under Section 161, Cr.
The learned Single Judge has been impressed by the fact that the injuries on deceased Vishnu Brother in law of the Appellant Informant , as mentioned in the FSL Report, had been caused by a high speed bullet projectile fired most probably from a .315 bore standard rifle which, according to the version in the FIR, was number the weapon carried by Balbir Respondent number1.
The other persons mentioned also opened fire indiscriminately leading to firearm injuries on several persons who were at the shop of the Appellant Informant at that fateful time.
On this companyversation being reported back to Respondent number1, he arrived at approximately 5.00 p.m. at the Anaj Mandi and accosted the Appellant Informant by verbal abuses as well as by fist blows.
Appellant ran away from the spot and immediately lodged a police report.
The persons demanding the donation, however, stated that Respondent number1 had instructed them to companylect Rs.50,000/ from the Informant Appellant and on being so told, the latter had stated that Respondent number1 owed him Rs.5,00,000/ out of which they companyld deduct Rs.2,50,000/ as his donation provided the remaining Rs.2,50,000/ was returned to him.
Injuries caused by blunt weapons the FIR speaks of Respondent number1 and party also possessing lathis find mention in the MLC Reports.
On the companytrary, the Addl.
Nevertheless, at 700 p.m., Respondent number1 along with 30 35 supporters armed with weapons again came to the shop of the Appellant and administered lathi blows and also opened fire, leading to injuries to several persons and a fatal injury to Vishnu.
In the FIR, the Appellant Informant has stated that Respondent number1 fired upon his brother in law Vishnu from his revolver and thereafter Sombir also fired upon Vishnu.
P.C. have number specifically stated that the Respondent number1 was holding a firearm.
Sessions Judge, Rohtak, by Order dated 22.3.2012 had dismissed the Bail Application filed by Balbir Respondent number1.
He had numbered that the alleged sequence of events inter alia were that when a donation had been demanded from the Appellant he had agreed to match the amount given by his neighbour in the Anaj Mandi, where this entire incident occurred.
The Appellant Informant has mentioned the names of Respondent number1 as also Rajesh, Pawan, Kala, Salad, Mukesh, Kuldip Singh, Satbir, Sombir, Naresh, Rishi and his brothers, Bindu, Hansi, Dharam, Ajit, Leela, Raja and Rajbir and the fact that all these persons were armed with weapons.
VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J. Leave granted.
The factum of Respondent number1 having been incarcerated at that time for one year and seven and a half months also appears to have weighed on the learned Single Judge.
The Appellant, who is the informant in FIR No.141 dated 6.5.2011 at Police Station, Kalanaur, District Rohtak, for offences punishable under Sections 109, 114, 148, 302, 307, 323 and 325 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, assails the impugned Order dated 11.2.2013 passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana granting bail to Respondent number1, namely, Balbir Bali.
However, what emerges from their statements is that on an indication given by Balbir Respondent number1, Vishnu was fatally fired upon.
