High Court · 2025

Devendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

3. The vakalatnama of Sri Suraj Pandey is not on record, despite the fact that his name is printed in the cause list.

4. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet about it.

5. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Vivek seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.326 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor.

6. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on

14.11.2024 by Arpit Rajpoot against the applicant and one unknown person alleging therein that his father had sold his land and given Rs.7 lakhs to his cousin Vivek - the present applicant, who had on false pretext taken the money for opening a shop but neither he opened the shop nor he had returned the money. The marriage of sister of the informant was fixed on which his father had demanded money back but the applicant did not return the money as such he was having enmity with the father of the informant. On 12.11.2024 in the evening, he called his father and murdered him and burnt his dead body. He identified his father after seeing the messages circulating on the WhatsApp regarding the dead body.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye witness of the murder. It is further submitted that the applicant did not take any money from the deceased. It is further submitted that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of suspicion only. While placing paragraph 18 of the affidavit it is submitted that no money was given by the deceased to the applicant but a false story has been concocted. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the affidavit and is in jail since 16.11.2024.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and there is an allegation against him. It is submitted that the applicant has motive to commit the aforesaid offence.

9. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that naming of the applicant in the present case is on the basis of suspicion. The present case is the case of circumstantial in nature and the links of the chain of evidence are missing.

10. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

11. Let the applicant- Vivek be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one of the sureties will be of his family members and the other will be of a local person) 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. (ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 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, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) 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 351 B.N.S.S.,

2023. 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

12. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Manoj MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Devendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

3. The vakalatnama of Sri Suraj Pandey is not on record, despite the fact that his name is printed in the cause list.

4. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet about it.

5. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Vivek seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.326 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor.

6. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on

14.11.2024 by Arpit Rajpoot against the applicant and one unknown person alleging therein that his father had sold his land and given Rs.7 lakhs to his cousin Vivek - the present applicant, who had on false pretext taken the money for opening a shop but neither he opened the shop nor he had returned the money. The marriage of sister of the informant was fixed on which his father had demanded money back but the applicant did not return the money as such he was having enmity with the father of the informant. On 12.11.2024 in the evening, he called his father and murdered him and burnt his dead body. He identified his father after seeing the messages circulating on the WhatsApp regarding the dead body.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye witness of the murder. It is further submitted that the applicant did not take any money from the deceased. It is further submitted that the implication of the applicant is on the basis of suspicion only. While placing paragraph 18 of the affidavit it is submitted that no money was given by the deceased to the applicant but a false story has been concocted. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the affidavit and is in jail since 16.11.2024.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and there is an allegation against him. It is submitted that the applicant has motive to commit the aforesaid offence.

9. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that naming of the applicant in the present case is on the basis of suspicion. The present case is the case of circumstantial in nature and the links of the chain of evidence are missing.

10. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

11. Let the applicant- Vivek be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one of the sureties will be of his family members and the other will be of a local person) 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. (ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 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, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) 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 351 B.N.S.S.,

2023. 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

12. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

13. The bail application is allowed.

14. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Manoj MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad