Vimal Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7153 of 2023 Applicant :- Vimal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhand Kumar Pandey,Abhishek Singh,Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Dharmendra Pratap Singh,Gajendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bajrang Bahadur Singh Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶1Rejoinder affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Bajrang Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant and perused the record.

¶3This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant-Vimal Singh for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.239/2021, under Sections 364, 302 & 201 I.P.C., Police Station-Ramnagar, District-Barabanki, during trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶5It is next submitted that the applicant is having a long standing enmity with the informant side. Attention of this Court in this regard has been drawn to the copy of the plaint placed at page No.42 of the paperbook as well as the NCR, which has been filed by the uncle of the applicant, namely, Suresh, a copy of which has been placed at page No.50 in order to show that on the basis of this enmity, the name of the applicant has been dragged into this case.

¶6It is further submitted that the investigation of this case remained pending for about two years and thereafter on

27.01.2022, a skeleton is shown to have been found from an agricultural field, which had already been searched and the DNA samples were taken and incidentally, the samples were matched and the skeleton was identified to be of the deceased and thereafter, the additional statement of the informant was recorded wherein only an apprehension has been shown that the deceased has been done to death by the applicant with other co-accused persons.

¶7It is vehemently submitted that after thorough investigation, a report under Section 169 Cr.P.C was submitted by the investigating officer on 11.01.2022 and simply after recording of the additional statement of the informant without there being any additional evidence or material, the charge sheet has been filed.

¶8It is also submitted that there is no iota of evidence against the applicant except suspicion and apprehension. He is in jail in this case since 27.01.2023. The prosecution witnesses are being recorded before the trial Court and the applicant undertakes that he will remain present before the trail Court in case, the facility of bail be granted to him and will not seek any adjournment especially when the prosecution witness would be in attendance. He is also not having any criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶9Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed an heinous offence and having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, he is not entitled to be released on bail, but could not controvert the other factual submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10Shri Bajrang Bahadur Singh, learned counsel appearing for the informant/ complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant by citing the statements of witnesses Rahul, Pankaj, Pradeep and Karan in order to show that on the basis of prior enmity, the deceased has been done to death. It is also submitted that statement of P.W.1 is being recorded before the trial Court who has stated that deceased had seen the applicant with his aunty in a compromising position and it is for screening the immoral relationship, the deceased has been done to death by the applicant with other co-accused persons. Therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶11Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that after lodging of the first information report pertaining to the missing of the deceased wherein only an apprehension has been shown that the offence might has been committed by the applicant and other co-accused persons, no material or evidence could be collected by the investigating officer as the statement of many witnesses recorded would not show any complicity of the applicant and it is in this background that even after recovery of the skeleton and matching of the DNA samples, the report under Section 169 Cr.P.C. was filed in favour of the applicant. Thereafter, the additional statement of the informant is shown to have been recorded wherein again an apprehension has been shown that the offence has been committed by the applicant. I have gone through the material which has been placed before this Court by the State in its counter affidavit. Apart from the statement of some prosecution witnesses wherein only an apprehension has been shown against the applicant and other co-accused person, I do not find any material or evidence which may connect the applicant with the crime. Certainly the case of the prosecution against the applicant is based on circumstantial evidence and it is for the trial Court to appreciate the circumstances which would be produced before it in the shape of witnesses. Applicant is in jail in this case since 27.01.2023 without any previous criminal history. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶12Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.

¶13Let the accused/applicant-Vimal Singh involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶16Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 17.10.2023 Gurpreet Singh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench