Vijay Kumar v. State of U.P

Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43864 of 2023 Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Singh,Sarvagya Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶1Heard Sri Madan Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ajit Kumar Madhesiya, learned brief holder for the State-respondent.

¶2The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station-Chaubeypur, District-Varanasi, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶3FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown person and according to the FIR, son of the informant had gone on his job on

14.05.2023 at about 7:00 a.m. in the morning from his house and thereafter did not return and on 15.05.2023 his dead body was found behind a tube well.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that nobody was named in the FIR and when the statement of the informant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then he raised suspicion against applicant and thereafter a CCTV footage was procured by the Investigating Officer, in which, it reflected that deceased was giving water to a person and when CCTV footage was seen by the mother and wife of the deceased then they identified that applicant was the person, who was receiving water from the deceased and thereafter it is alleged that applicant was arrested and he confessed his guilt and from his possession, one auto was recovered. He further submitted that neither there is allegation nor any evidence that the alleged auto was ever used in the crime. He further submitted that except the above mentioned evidence, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record.

¶5He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 20.05.2023.

¶6Per contra, learned AGA although, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶8It is a case of circumstantial evidence and from the record, it reflects that except the fact that deceased was giving water to the applicant before his death, there is no other evidence against the applicant on record, therefore, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶10Let the applicant-Vijay Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶11In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶12It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 16.10.2023 KK Patel High Court of Judicature at Allahabad