High Court · 2025

H o n ' b l e Ra k esh Th a p l i y al , J. 1. Mr. Adit ya Singh, learned counsel for t he applicant . lear ned Addl. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocat e General wit h Mr. Deepak Bhar dwaj and Mr. Him anshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for t he St at e. 3. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel for t he com plainant . Present applicant Robin, S/ o Kam al 4. Singh is praying for bail in r elat ion t o FI R dat ed 13.12.2024, bearing FI R No. 0307 of 2024, regist er ed at P.S. Khanpur Dist rict Haridwar wher ein t he pr esent applicant along wit h t wo ot hers, nam ely, Akshay and Ankit Farar wer e t he Sect ions offences 103( 1) , 238, 3( 5) and 311 of BNS 2023. 5. Brief fact s, of t he case, are t hat a m issing r eport no. 13 of 2024 was filed on 09.12.2024, wit h regard t o m issing of one Ram shankar w ho was m issing 08.12.2024, and, t her eaft er, dead body of Ram shankar ( deceased) , one plast ic bag/ j ut e bag, k haki t ape, t hr ee packet s of t at a salt wer e r ecovered on point ing out of present applicant Robin and ot her accused Akshay on 13.12.2024, in t he bank of Banganga t hereaft er post m ort em was conduct ed and as per t he post m ort em r eport following inj uries w er e found on t he deceased Ram shankar: im plicat ed t he body of river and punishable ( i) Cont usion of size 5cm x4cm over right side angle of eye. ( ii) Mult iple abrasion size of largest 7cm x1cm over B/ L pariet al area of skull. The cause of deat h, as per t he post m ort em r eport , could not be ascert ained t he viscera was preser ved chem ical analysis. t he m obile of for cash m oney and on t he m obile of nam ely, Vinay Kum ar The pr esent applicant and t he ot her co- accused w er e arrest ed on 13.12.2024, and during invest igat ion it was found t hat present applicant t ransferr ed t he am ount UPI t ransact ion from t he m obile of t he deceased on t he ot her per sons, Praveen Kum ar bearing m obile nos. 9368461711 and 9149360336 of Rs. 10,000/ - and Rs. 20,000/ - respect ively, and on furt her int errogat ion wit h Vinay Kum ar and Praveen Kum ar t hey st at ed t hat one unknow n person wit h m uffled face w earing w hit e hoody cam e and request s t his assurance t hat he will refund t he am ount by UPI t ransact ion, Rs. 30,000/ - w er e paid in cash which was ret ur ned back by UPI t he t ransact ion deceased. Aft er int errogat ion wit h Vinay Kum ar and Praveen Kum ar, CCTV foot ages inst alled in t he pet rol pum p wer e analyzed and one vehicle bearing no. UP12AN 8378 KUV 100 was found and it was found t hat t he ow ner of t he vehicle is one Anil Kum ar who was furt her int errogat ed by t he I .O. who infor m ed t hat one Sonu Fauj i t ook his car on 06.12.2024 and t hereaft er Sonu Fauj i left for his j ob. On t his t he I .O. int errogat ed t he fat her of Sonu Fauj i who inform ed t hat t he car was t ook by t he present applicant on 08.12.2024. 6. On t he pr evious dat e it was argued by Mr. Adit ya Singh, lear ned counsel for t he applicant t hat in order t o com plet e t he chain, t he invest igat ing officer has not m ade any at t em pt t o enquir e about t he conduct of Vinay Kukm ar and Praveen Kum ar and also t he conduct of t he owner of t he vehicle Anil Kum ar, and subm it s t hat t he ent ire recovery, as show n on t he point ing out of t he pr esent applicant is false, since, at t he t im e when t he r ecovery was shown t he applicant was in police cust ody. He furt her argued t hat t he invest igat ion appears t o invest igat ion fault y and be fault y w hich is evident from t he fact t hat Sonu Fauj i was shown t o be left t o j oin fauj , t hough, as per t he st at em ent of Anil Kum ar, t he owner of t he vehicle, as well as fat her of Sonu Fauj i, he was in t he village w here t he incident was happened. He subm it s t hat m er ely on t his basis t hat Sonu Fauj i left for t he j ob, t he applicant has been char ge sheet ed, t he conduct of Sonu Fauj i also appear s t o be doubt ful. t hough, Apart Finally, concluded t his, he subm it s in w hose car, as per t hat even t he conduct of Anil Kum ar is also t he doubt ful prosecut ion, dead body of t he deceased is not m ade an was brought but he accused. argum ent s by subm it t ing t hat t he ent ire invest igat ion is fault y as t here is no link evidence, and, as such, t he applicant is innocent and he is languishing in j ail since 13.12.2024, and in t his part icular case char ge sheet has already been filed on 11.03.2025, t her efore, t here is no need of cust odial int errogat ion of t he applicant and he deserves for bail. He also subm it s t hat recovery of car appears t o be doubt ful since, as per t he st at em ent of Anil Kum ar, t he car r et ur ned back on 10.12.2024 wher eas t he car is show n t o be r ecovered on t he point ing out of t he applicant on 14.12.2024, and t here is no any such evidence w hen again Anil Kum ar handed over t he car t o t he applicant . 7. On t he ot her side, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocat e General for t he St at e applicat ion by subm it t ing t hat t here ar e link evidence and aft er collect ing all credible evidence char ge sheet has been filed and t her e are CCTV foot ages and t her e is r ecovery of dead body on point ing t he applicant . There ar e also out of evidence of m oney t hrough UPI from t he m obile of t he deceased t o t wo persons w ho are serving in t he pet rol pum p and t he m obile t hrough w hich t he vehem ent ly t ransact ion opposed t he t o t hat t hat som e ext ent t ransferring UPI t ransact ion was done was r ecovered t he pr esent applicant . He also point ed out t he pr esent applicant anot her co- accused also confessed t heir guilt . 8. Mr. Rahul Consul, lear ned counsel who appear s for t he com plainant fairly t he subm it s invest igat ion is fault y and for t hat reason he has filed writ pet it ion bearing WPCRL t he No. 758 of 2025 invest igat ion t o CBI in which not ices have been issued on 18.07.2025. He furt her argued t hat what ever be t he evidence has been collect ed by t he invest igat ing agency against t he pr esent applicant clearly est ablishes t hat t he applicant is involved in com m ission of t his crim e, t herefor e, even if t here is a lapse on t he part of t he invest igat ing agency, at t his j unct ur e w hen t he Court applicat ion t his aspect cannot be looked int o. He also subm it s t hat t he deceased was brut ally m ur dered by t he applicant in associat ion wit h t he co- accused and for com m ission of t his crim e t her e was st rong m ot ive. 9. Aft er hearing t he argum ent s of t he learned counsel for t he part ies and aft er per using t he ent ire records including t he FI R, charge sheet as w ell as post m ort em report and t he r ecovery m em o, t his Court is of t he view t hat since aft er collect ing all credible evidence char ge sheet has been filed against t he present applicant and t he ot her t her efor e, wit hout expr essing any opinion on t he m erit s of t he case, t his Court is of t he view t hat t he applicant does not deser ve for bail. 10. Accordingly rej ect ed. co- accused, considering applicat ion t he ( Ra k e sh Th a p l i y a l , J.) 2 4 .0 7 .2 0 2 5 Parul