Joni v. State of U.P (2023:AHC:223616)

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Decided: 23 November 2023
Case no.: BAIL 42529/2023

Official PDF Read full judgment Report an error

Judgment

Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42529 of 2023 Applicant :- Joni Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neha Tyagi,Akash Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. Heard Mr. Akash Tyagi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. Perused the record. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Joni seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2023, under Sections 302, 120-B, 201, 202 IPC and Section 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station-Saroorpur, District-Meerut during the pendency of trial. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 02.02.2023, a delayed first information report dated 04.02.2023 was lodged by the first informant, namely, Rajpal (uncle of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No.0027 of 2023, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station-Saroorpur, District-Meerut. In the aforesaid first information report, two persons, namely, Joni and Preeti have been nominated as named accused, whereas some unknown persons have also been arraigned as accused. Learned counsel for applicant submits that since the charge-sheet has been submitted against named co-accused Preeti and Joni (applicant herein) and not named co-accused Banti and Sandeep and out of which three of the charge-sheeted accused have already been enlarged on bail therefore, the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. contends that named accused Preeti has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 26.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.26062 of 2023 (Preeti Vs. State of U.P.). For Ready reference, the same is reproduced herein-under :- "1. Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Ashish Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant.

Perused

the

record.

¶3This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Preeti seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201, 120B IPC, Police Station-Saroorpur, District-Meerut during the pendency of trial.

¶4It transpires from record that one Sandeep went missing from 02.02.2023. Thereafter, a missing person's report dated 03.02.2023 was lodged by Rajpal (uncle of the missing person). After the aforementioned missing person report was lodged, the police of police station concerned collected the call details of the deceased. On the basis of above, the complicity of 2 persons namely Sandeep and Jony came to surface. Accordingly, Jony was questioned by police. At the time of his interrogation, he is alleged to have made his confessional statement regarding the commission of crime in question. Subsequently, on his pointing out, the motorcycle that was used in the commission of the crime bearing Registration No. U.P. 15 CH 1913 (Splendor Plus) was recovered. The complicity of another co-accused namely Sandeep was also alleged. As such, this accused was also arrested.

¶5Subsequently, on the pointing of Jony, the dead body of the deceased was recovered by the police. Ultimately, the weapon of assault i.e. country made gun was also recovered on the pointing out of co-accused Sandeep on

02.03.2023. After aforesaid recoveries had been made, the statement of the named accused Jony was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. This accused in his confessional statement has taken the name of the present applicant and simply on the basis of above, Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that as per above and also the call detail report of the deceased, the complicity of present applicant is also established in the crime in question. In the submission of the learned counsel for applicant except for the above, there is no evidence against applicant in the entire material collected by the Investigating

Officer.

¶6It is further submitted that after completion of investigation of concerned case crime number, Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet dated

30.04.2023 whereby 2 of the named accused Jony and Priti and not named accused Sandeep and Banti have been charge sheeted under Sections 302, 201, 202, 120B IPC and Sections 3/25 and 27 Arms Act.

¶7At the very outset, the learned counsel for applicant contends that though applicant is named and charge sheeted accused yet she is liable to be enlarged on bail. Applicant is the widow of deceased (Sandeep). The only evidence that has emerged against applicant in the crime in question is the confessional statement of co-accused Jony and the call detail report that goes to show that applicant had telephonic conversation with Jony. However, no recovery has been made from the applicant. All the recoveries pertaining to the crime in question were made from co-accused Jony and Sandeep. As such, the case of present applicant is clearly distinguishable from co-accused Jony and Sandeep and therefore, she is liable to be enlarged on bail. Even otherwise, applicant being a lady is entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso

Section

Cr.P.C.

¶8It is lastly contended that co-accused Sandeep has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31259 of 2023 (Sandeep Vs. State of U.P.). For ready reference, the same is re-produced hereinunder:- "वररममान दमाणणቄኌक ्ቚककीरर जममानर ्ቚमाररनमा प्ቔ आववेदक ससंददीप ककी ओर सवे ममु०अ०स० 27/2023, अन्ररर धमारमा 302, 201, 120 बदी भमा०दसं०वव०, रमानमा सरुरपमुर, जजलमा मवेरठ मम जममानर पर ममु्ሹ करनवे हवेरमु ्ቚस्रमुर वकयमा रयमा हहै। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा एवसं ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा कको समुनमा ररमा प्ቔमावलदी कमा पररशदीलन वकयमा। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा नवे रकर ्ቚस्रमुर वकयमा वक आववेदक कको इस ्ቚकरर मम रलर एवसं फजरኍ ‌ढंग‌से‌झूठा‌फं साया‌गया‌है ,oउसने‌कजथत‌अपराध‌काररत‌नहीሻ ‌वकया‌ह।ै ‌आवेदक दारा‌सहअवभयक् गणत‌के ‌साथ‌वमलकर‌मृतक‌की‌हत् या‌नहीሻ ‌की‌गयी‌ह‌ै और‌न‌ही‌कोईु षडंतቔ ‌बनाया‌गया‌ह।ै ‌आवेदक‌दारा‌कजथत‌घटना‌काररत‌करने‌का‌कोई‌हेतुक‌नहीሻ ‌ह।ै तथाकजथत‌घटना‌कोई‌पቚ त् यकቌ दशरኍ ‌साकቌ ी‌नहीሻ ‌ह।ै ‌मामले‌मे‌वास् तववक‌तथ् य‌यह‌ह‌ै वक मृतक‌की‌पत् नी‌पቚ ीती‌का‌मृतक‌के ‌ही‌भांजे‌ (जोनी)oसे‌अवैध‌संबंध‌हो‌गया‌था,oइसकी जानकारी‌मतृ क‌को‌हो‌गयी‌थी‌तथा‌वह‌इसका‌ववरोध‌करने‌लगा।‌तब‌मतृ क‌की‌पत् नी‌व मृतक‌का‌भांजा‌(जोनी)oसुवनयोजजत‌तरीके ‌से‌योजना‌बनाकर,oमृतक‌को‌जंगल‌मे‌बुलाकर सहअवभयकሹु ‌जोनी‌दारा‌उसकी‌गोली‌मारकर‌हत् या‌कर‌दी‌गयी।‌जजससे‌स् पषቖ ‌ह‌ै वक‌मामले के ‌सहअवभयकሹ गण‌जोनी‌व‌पቚ ीती‌दारा‌अपने‌अवैध‌संबंधोሩ ‌मे‌बाधा‌बन‌रहे‌मृतक‌कीु सुवनयोजजत‌तरीके ‌से‌हत् या‌की‌गयी।‌आवेदक‌की‌कजथत‌अपराध‌मे‌कोई‌भूवमका‌दवशरत नहीሻ ‌है,oतथाकजथत‌घटना‌मुख् य‌रू प‌से‌सहअवभयकሹु गण‌जोनी‌व‌पቚ ीती‌दारा‌काररत‌वकया जाना‌पररलवकቌ त‌ह।ै ‌आवेदक‌वनदरኘ ष‌ह‌ै तथा‌वह‌इस‌पቚ करण‌मे‌वद०‌ 02.03.2023oसे कारागार‌मे‌वनरु दቍ ‌ह।ै ‌इसजलए‌आवेदक‌को‌जमानत‌पर‌छोड़ ‌वदया‌जाय। ववदान‌अपर‌शासकीय‌अजधवकሹ ा‌ने‌आवेदक‌के ‌जमानत‌का‌पቚ बल‌ववरोध‌करते‌हहए‌तकर पቚ स् तुत‌वकया‌वक‌आवेदक‌दारा‌काररत‌अपराध‌संजेय‌एवं‌गंभीर‌पቚ कृ वत‌का‌है ,oइसजलए आवेदक‌को‌जमानत‌पर‌न‌छोड़ ा‌जाय। आवेदक‌के ‌ववदान‌अजधवकሹ ा‌के ‌तकोሩ ‌के ‌पररपቚ ेकኚ य‌मे‌पतቔ ावली‌पर‌उपलब् ध‌सारवान‌तथ् योሩ एवं‌पररबस् थवतयोሩ ‌का‌समगቇ ‌रू प‌से‌अवलोकन‌करने‌के ‌बाद ,oसबूतोሩ ‌की‌पቚ कृ वत‌और‌वकसी भी‌ठोस‌ववरोधात् मक‌सामगቇ ी‌की‌अनुपबस् थवत‌एवं‌उपलब् ध‌सामगቇ ी‌से‌छेड़ छाड़ ‌की‌संभावना न‌होने‌के ‌तथ् य‌को‌देखते‌हहए‌मेरी‌राय‌मे‌आवेदक‌को‌जमानत‌पर‌मुकሹ ‌करने‌का‌उपयकሹु आधार‌ह।ै ह रअतः‌वाद‌के ‌गणु -दोष‌पर‌वबना‌कोई‌वटप् पणी‌वकए‌हए‌आवेदक‌को‌उपरोकሹ ‌ववणत‌अपराध मे‌संबंजधत‌न् यायालय‌की‌संतुवषቖ ‌पर‌व् यवकሹ गत‌बंध-पतቔ ‌एवं‌अजधक‌धनरावश‌के ‌दो‌स् थानीय पቚ वतभू‌पቚ स् तुत‌करने‌पर‌वनम् नजलजखत‌शतरኘ ‌के ‌साथ‌जमानत‌पर‌छोड़ ‌वदया‌जाय।ं

1.oआवेदक‌वववेचना‌या‌परीकቌ ण‌के ‌दौरान‌अवभयोजन‌साकኚ योሩ ‌के ‌साथ‌छेड़ छाड़ ‌नहीሻ ‌करगे ा।

2.oआवेदक‌अवभयोजन‌सावकቌ योሩ ‌व‌पीवड़ ता‌/oवशकायतकतार‌को‌डኌ रायेगा/धमकायेगा‌नहीሻ ‌।

¶3oआवेदक‌न् यायालय‌के ‌आदेशोሩ ‌का‌पालन‌करगे ा , oवह‌परीकቌ ण‌के ‌दौरान‌वबना‌कोई अनावश् यक‌स् थगन‌जलए‌वनयत‌वतजथ‌पर‌न् यायालय‌मे‌उपबस् थत‌होगा‌तथा‌परीकቌ ण‌मे ईमानदारी‌से‌सहयोग‌करगे ा।

¶4आववेदक जममानर पर ररहमा हकोनवे कवे बमाद जममानर ककी स्वरसं्ቔरमा कमा दमुरूपयकोर नहदी करवेरमा और वकसदी भदी अपरमाजधक रवरववजध मम जल्቎ नहीሻ हकोरमा न ककोई अपरमाजधक कमृत्य करवेरमा।

¶9Even otherwise, applicant is a woman of clean antecedents inasmuch as, she has no criminal history to her credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 05.02.2023. As such, she has undergone more than 6 months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized. However, up to this stage, there is no such incriminating circumstance necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. It is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.

¶10Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that mens rea to commit the murder of the deceased is duly established against applicant from the record. The applicant is the wife of the deceased. However, irrespective of above, she maintained extra marital relation with co-accused Jony and therefore, the crime was committed. They, therefore, submit that no indulgence by shown by this Court in favour of applicant. Even otherwise, applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused. Up to this stage, there is nothing on record to infer the innocence of the applicant. They, therefore, contend that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant.

¶11Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, Mr. Ashish Singh, the learned counsel representing first informant and upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, complicity of applicant and accusations made coupled with the fact that co-accused Sandeep has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, the learned A.G.A. as well as the learned counsel representing first informant could not point out any such distinguishing feature to distinguish the case of present applicant from bailed out co-accused Sandeep so as to deny him bail, the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, as such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized, the only evidence that has emerged against applicant is the confessional statement of co-accused Jony and the call detail report of the applicant, the recovery of the motorcycle used in the commission of crime as well as the dead body of the deceased has been made on the pointing out of co-accused Jony, the recovery of weapon of assault has been made from the co-accused Sandeep, present case is a case of circumstantial evidence, however, neither there is any evidence of last seen, nor any recovery has been made from applicant, applicant is a woman of clean antecedents inasmuch as, she has no criminal history to her credit except the present one, applicant is in jail since 05.02.2023, as such, she has undergone more than 6 months of incarceration, applicant being a lady is entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C., but without making any comment on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.

12.

Accordingly,

the

bail

application

allowed.

¶13Let the applicant-Preeti be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE

WITH

LAW.

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE

WITH

LAW.

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE

OF

THE

APPLICANT.

¶14However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above." Learned A.G.A. further contends that another not named co-accused Sandeep has also been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31259 of 2023 (Sandeep Vs. State of U.P.). For ready reference, the same is reproduced herein-under :- "वररममान दमाणणቄኌक ्ቚककीरर जममानर ्ቚमाररनमा प्ቔ आववेदक ससंददीप ककी ओर सवे ममु०अ०स० 27/2023, अन्ररर धमारमा 302, 201, 120 बदी भमा०दसं०वव०, रमानमा सरुरपमुर, जजलमा मवेरठ मम जममानर पर ममु्ሹ करनवे हवेरमु ्ቚस्रमुर वकयमा रयमा हहै। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा एवसं ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा कको समुनमा ररमा प्ቔमावलदी कमा पररशदीलन वकयमा। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा नवे रकर ्ቚस्रमुर वकयमा वक आववेदक कको इस ्ቚकरर मम रलर एवसं फजቌኍ ढसंर सवे झझूठमा फसंसमायमा रयमा हहै, उसनवे कजरर अपरमाध कमाररर नहीሻ वकयमा हहै। आववेदक दारा‌सहअवभयक्ु गणत‌के ‌साथ‌वमलकर‌मृतक‌की‌हत् या‌नहीሻ ‌की‌गयी‌ह‌ै और‌न‌ही‌कोई षडंतቔ ‌बनाया‌गया‌ह।ै ‌आवेदक‌दारा‌कजथत‌घटना‌काररत‌करने‌का‌कोई‌हेतुक‌नहीሻ ‌ह।ै ेतथाकजथत‌घटना‌कोई‌पቚ त् यकቌ दशरኍ ‌साकቌ ी‌नहीሻ ‌ह।ै ‌मामले‌म‌वास् तववक‌तथ् य‌यह‌ह‌ै वक मृतक‌की‌पत् नी‌पቚ ीती‌का‌मृतक‌के ‌ही‌भांजे‌ (जोनी)oसे‌अवैध‌संबंध‌हो‌गया‌था,oइसकी जानकारी‌मतृ क‌को‌हो‌गयी‌थी‌तथा‌वह‌इसका‌ववरोध‌करने‌लगा।‌तब‌मतृ क‌की‌पत् नी‌व मृतक‌का‌भांजा‌(जोनी)oसुवनयोजजत‌तरीके ‌से‌योजना‌बनाकर,oमृतक‌को‌जंगल‌मे‌बुलाकर सहअवभयकሹु ‌जोनी‌दारा‌उसकी‌गोली‌मारकर‌हत् या‌कर‌दी‌गयी।‌जजससे‌स् पषቖ ‌ह‌ै वक‌मामले के ‌सहअवभयकሹु गण‌जोनी‌व‌पቚ ीती‌दारा‌अपने‌अवैध‌संबंधोሩ ‌मे‌बाधा‌बन‌रहे‌मृतक‌की सुवनयोजजत‌तरीके ‌से‌हत् या‌की‌गयी।‌आवेदक‌की‌कजथत‌अपराध‌मे‌कोई‌भूवमका‌दवशरत नहीሻ ‌है,oतथाकजथत‌घटना‌मुख् य‌रू प‌से‌सहअवभयकሹ गण‌जोनी‌व‌पቚ ीती‌दारा‌काररत‌वकयाु ेजाना‌पररलवकቌ त‌ह।ै ‌आवेदक‌वनदरኘ ष‌ह‌ै तथा‌वह‌इस‌पቚ करण‌म‌वद०‌ 02.03.2023oसे कारागार‌मे‌वनरु दቍ ‌ह।ै ‌इसजलए‌आवेदक‌को‌जमानत‌पर‌छोड़ ‌वदया‌जाय। ह रववदान‌अपर‌शासकीय‌अजधवकሹ ा‌ने‌आवेदक‌के ‌जमानत‌का‌पቚ बल‌ववरोध‌करते‌हए‌तक पቚ स् तुत‌वकया‌वक‌आवेदक‌दारा‌काररत‌अपराध‌संजेय‌एवं‌गंभीर‌पቚ कृ वत‌का‌है ,oइसजलए आवेदक‌को‌जमानत‌पर‌न‌छोड़ ा‌जाय। आवेदक‌के ‌ववदान‌अजधवकሹ ा‌के ‌तकोሩ ‌के ‌पररपቚ ेकኚ य‌मे‌पतቔ ावली‌पर‌उपलब् ध‌सारवान‌तथ् योሩ एवं‌पररबस् थवतयोሩ ‌का‌समगቇ ‌रू प‌से‌अवलोकन‌करने‌के ‌बाद ,oसबूतोሩ ‌की‌पቚ कृ वत‌और‌वकसी भी‌ठोस‌ववरोधात् मक‌सामगቇ ी‌की‌अनुपबस् थवत‌एवं‌उपलब् ध‌सामगቇ ी‌से‌छेड़ छाड़ ‌की‌संभावना न‌होने‌के ‌तथ् य‌को‌देखते‌हहए‌मेरी‌राय‌मे‌आवेदक‌को‌जमानत‌पर‌मुकሹ ‌करने‌का‌उपयकሹु आधार‌ह।ै ह रअतः‌वाद‌के ‌गणु -दोष‌पर‌वबना‌कोई‌वटप् पणी‌वकए‌हए‌आवेदक‌को‌उपरोकሹ ‌ववणत‌अपराध ेम‌संबंजधत‌न् यायालय‌की‌संतुवषቖ ‌पर‌व् यवकሹ गत‌बंध-पतቔ ‌एवं‌अजधक‌धनरावश‌के ‌दो‌स् थानीय पቚ वतभू‌पቚ स् तुत‌करने‌पर‌वनम् नजलजखत‌शतरኘ ‌ं के ‌साथ‌जमानत‌पर‌छोड़ ‌वदया‌जाय।

¶5आववेदक ्ቚत्य्ቌ यमा अ्ቚत्य्ቌ रूप सवे ममामलवे कवे रथ्योሩ सवे पररवचर वकसदी भदी व्यव्ሹ यमा पमुजलस अजधकमाररयोሩ कको ककोई ्ቚलकोभन यमा धमककी नहीሻ दवेरमा न हदी उनसवे ककोई वमायदमा करवेरमा, जजसकवे कमारर उन्हम न्यमायमालय मम रथ्योሩ कको उजमारर करनवे सवे ववरर रहनमा पड़वे। उपरको्ሹ शरቖኘसं मम सवे वकसदी कवे उलसंघन कवे ममामलवे मम, परदी्ቌर न्यमायमालय आववेदक ककी जममानर वनयममानमुसमार र्ቌ करनवे कको स्वरसं्ቔ हहै।" Learned A.G.A. with reference to the order dated 26.07.2023 pertaining to named co-accused Preeti submits that this Court while deciding the bail application of co-accused Preeti has categorically observed in paragraph 11 of the order that the recovery of motorcycle used in the commission of crime as well as the dead body of the deceased have been made on the pointing out of present applicant Jony. He, therefore, contends that by reasons of above the complicity of present applicant is fully established in the crime in question. As such, the case of present applicant is distinguishable from other charge-sheeted accused. He, therefore, contends that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant. As such, the present application for bail is liable to be rejected. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, nature and gravity of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, accusation made coupled with the fact that this Court while deciding the bail application of co-accused Preeti has recorded categorical finding against the applicant as is evident from the recital contained in paragraph 11 of the order, which finding could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant as being perverse therefore irrespective of the submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant in support of the bail application but, without making any comment on the merits of the case, this Court does not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. This application for bail thus fails and is liable to be rejected. It is accordingly rejected. Order Date :- 24.11.2023. Rks. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Source: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.