Parvez v. Union of India Through C.B.I

Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10446 of 2023 Applicant :- Parvez Opposite Party :- Union Of India Through C.B.I. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Krishna Verma,Atul Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶1Heard Sri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dharmendra Singh holding brief of Sri Anurag Singh, learned counsel for the C.B.I. and perused the records.

¶2This is the third application seeking release of the applicant on bail in R.C S.I 2021 S0001 SC N0-952 of 2021, under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 420, 506/34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station C.B.I SC1, New Delhi, District Lucknow.

¶3As per the case of the CBI, a missing complaint dated

23.12.2020 was filed by Shivam Keshari, son of Ramashankar Keshari, resident of K-64/48, Gola Dinanath, Varanasi through IGRS Portal of U.P. Government alleging there that his brother, Shubham Keshari had been missing from 7 PM on 22.12.2020. When no action was taken on the said application, Shivam Keshari filed applications before the District Magistrate on 26.12.2020, Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi, Superintendent of Police (Crime) and also approached the Hon'ble Chief Minister and the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh. When whereabouts of his brother were not known, Shivam Keshari filed Habeas Corpus Petition No.1 of 2021 before this Court.

¶4After filing the Habeas Corpus Petition on 4.1.2021, the matter was listed before this Court on 5.1.2021 and on the same day, Police Station Kotwali, Varanasi registered a missing report and started inquiring into the allegations/facts mentioned in the complaints filed by Shivam Keshari. Later on, two dead bodies of Shubham Keshari and Ravi Pandey, who had also gone missing since

22.12.2020 and a missing report about him was lodged at Varanasi Police Station, were recovered on 15.1.2021 from a ditch near Hanuman Pahadi in the hilly area of Village Chhato, Police Station Ahraura, District Mirzapur by the police of Police Station Ahraura. Thereafter, a case under Sections 302 and 201 IPC was registered by the police of the Police Station Ahraura. Later on, it was found by the police of the Police Station Ahraura that these deceased belonged to Varanasi and missing reports of these persons were pending in District Varanasi and, therefore, the case was transferred from Ahraura, District Mirzapur to Varanasi. The case was re-registered in Police Station Kotwali, Varanasi as FIR No.6 of 2021 on 18.1.2021 under Sections 302 and 201 IPC.

¶5This Court vide order dated 8.2.2021 passed in Habeas Corpus Petition No.1 of 2021 directed the CBI to take up the investigation of FIR No.6 of 2021. The CBI took over the investigation of the case on 17.2.2021 and re-registered the case as RC SI 2021 S 0001. On conclusion of the investigation, the CBI filed the charge sheet on 16.4.2021 under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 420, 506 and 34 IPC against Sunil Kumar Nigam, Neeraj Pandey, Parvez, Dilsher, Kareem Ansari and Guddu Bharadwaj for the murder of Shubham Keshari and Ravi Pandey, who were friends. The investigation of this case is kept open under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. and the same is still not completed.

¶6As per the evidence collected by the CBI, it was Dilsher, who had contacted Shivam Keshari, brother of the deceased, Shubham Keshari and falsely informed him in conspiracy with co-accused Sunil Kumar Nigam that Shubham Keshari was taken by the police. Under this wrong impression made by accused, Dilsher, Shivam Keshari approached this Court by filing Habeas Corpus Petition. The CBI in its investigation, has established that Shubham Keshari was murdered by the accused persons in conspiracy and at the behest of co-accused Sunil Kumar Nigam. They had also murdered Ravi Pandey to eliminate the eye witness of the murder of Shubham Keshari, who accompanied Shubham Keshari at the place of occurrence.

¶7The accused persons after murdering Shubham Keshari and Ravi Pandey on 22.10.2020, arranged a vehicle through Guddu Bharadwaj for disposing of the dead bodies. In the early morning hours of 23.12.2020, the accused persons threw dead bodies in the hilly area of Police Station Ahraura, District Mirzapur and poured acid on the dead bodies to destroy the evidence.

¶8The second bail application was rejected by means of an order dated 13.07.2023 passed in Bail No.3390 of 2023. Subsequent to rejection of the second bail application, co-accused person Karim Ansari has been granted bail by means of the order dated 24.07.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1344 of 2023.

¶9Allegations against co-accused, Karim Ansari was that he was present on the spot of occurrence along with two other co-accused persons-Neeraj Pandey and Dilsher.

¶10Allegation against the applicant is that the contract for killing the deceased was given to co-accused Neeraj Pandey and the applicant.

¶11Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that case set up against the applicant is in fact is on a weaker footing as the applicant was not present on the spot and regarding whom this much has been stated that he has been given contract of killing of deceased person, and that besides the statement of the co-accused, there is no other material against the applicant.

¶12Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that it is recorded in the charge-sheet that co-accused, Karim Ansari, who has been granted bail, had been seen outside the building in which the murders were committed and he was keeping a watch on the passers by.

¶13Learned counsel for the C.B.I. has opposed the bail application and has submitted that the case set up against the applicant is not similar to the case set up against Karim Ansari, Suneel Kumar Nigam and Guddu Bharadwaj, who have already been granted bail. The complicity of the applicant in commission of the offence is established on the basis of Call Detail Records of the accused persons.

¶14Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the only allegation against the applicant is that he was given contract for killing the deceased; that there is no direct evidence against the applicant and it is a case based on circumstantial evidence only; that three other co-accused persons have already been granted bail, including a person who is said to be present at the time and spot of the incident; that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.01.2021 and out of proposed 111 witnesses not even a single witness has been examined till date, and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶15Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶16Let the applicant-Parvez be released on bail in R.C S.I 2021 S0001 SC N0-952 of 2021, under Sections 120-B, 302, 201, 420, 506/34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station C.B.I SC1, New Delhi, District Lucknow on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 10.10.2023 prateek High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench