When the deceased went to that place, he was shot at by respondent number 2, accused Meer Hasan and one other accused named Wasim.
On being moved by the accused Meer Hasan respondent No.
Accused respondent number2 shot the fatal shot.
On 11.3.2003, the deceased was called to the factory of one Kamil, where the accused Naeem was working as a companytractor, by telephone call which was purportedly made by the accused Naeem.
Background facts as projected by the appellant essentially are as follows One Prem Kumar hereinafter referred to as the deceased was engaged in the business of money lending.
In the first information report, it was indicated that unknown assailants killed the deceased.
2, by the impugned judgment, a learned Single Judge has granted bail to him.
On the basis of statements made by three persons namely Nawab, Tulshi Ram and Harish Kakkar the respondent No.
2 was taken to custody.
After arrest the accused Meer Hasan filed application for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, which was rejected.
The first information report was lodged by a person who was number an eye witness.
Arising out of SLP CRL No.
4016/2003 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
2 hereinafter referred to as accused has been challenged in this appeal.
Grant of bail to respondent No.
