Conduct of accused

Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused drove cattle of complainant party; son of complainant tried to grapple with them, on which accused fired at him and killed him

Accused remained absconder for a considerable period

Accused was arrested from jail when he was under custody in another criminal case

Record reflected that accused was involved in a couple of heinous cases

Accused admitted his abscontion with the explanation that due to tribal enmity he absconded but during that period he indulged in criminal activities

Of course, no judgment regarding fate of the other cases had been placed, nevertheless, the worth of the FIRs and allegations contained therein carried sufficient weight and reflected the conduct of the accused

Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Despite murder of his wife, accused kept quiet and had not lodged report against any one and had not held responsible any third person for the murder

Circumstances established that at the time of said murder, accused was present in the housse

Accused had not disputed the unnatural death of the deceased

Facts and circumstances of the case suggested that actually the accused had committed the murder of his wife and due to the incident, his relatives locked him in a room and handed him over to the police

Appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed in circumstances.

F.I.R. was recorded within one hour of the incident, wherein accused was specifically nominated for firing at and killing the deceased

Accused and one of the co-accused were the main accused who were allegedly responsible for the murder

Accused remained a fugitive from law for 1-1/2 years and was arrested at the airport trying to leave the country

Accused due to his conduct, had disentitled himself from bail as there were chances of his absconsion

During the period of his abscondment accused was also nominated in another F.I.R.

Co-accused, who had been attributed the fatal injury was still a proclaimed offender

Prima facie case was made out against the accused and he had failed to make out a case for further inquiry

Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and bail granted to accused by the High Court was cancelled.

Relevance.

Conduct of accused was to be seen if he had taken the ground of statutory delay, while deciding bail on statutory ground, such as whether delay was by design by adopting various methods

If the court reached the conclusion from any source that delay was designed by the accused, then bail should not be granted even on grounds of statutory delay.

Conduct of accused had to be taken into consideration while awarding the discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail.

Discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail could not be extended to accused in such circumstances.

Accused was alleged to have instigated the co-accused persons to commit the murder of the deceased, whereafter the accused allegedly caused hatchet blows on the head of the deceased

Contentions of accused were that there was a delay of 11 hours in lodging of F.I.R. by the complainant after he had narrated the incident to his relatives and got the postmortem examination of the deceased; that some of the injuries allegedly sustained by the deceased were not described in the F.I.R.; that question as to which of the accused person caused the fatal blow needed further inquiry, and that co-accused who had similar role to that of the accused was let off by the police during investigation

Validity

Case diary showed that complainant and prosecution witnesses had been attending Trial Court for their evidence but the accused sought adjournments on one pretext or another

Such conduct of the accused did not entitle him for any concession in a murder case specially when there appeared reasonable grounds to believe that he was guilty of the offence alleged

Contentions raised by accused could be considered properly after recording evidence of complainant and prosecution witnesses

Delay in lodging of F.I.R. had been explained in the F.I.R. itself

F.I.R. showed that all accused persons had acted in furtherance of their common intention and present accused, in addition to his act of inflicting hatchet blow, was also assigned the role of instigation for commission of murder

Bail application of accused was dismissed, in circumstances.