State of U.P v. Party

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Mohit Behari Mathur, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

2. The instant Bail Application U/S 483 of the BNSS at the instance of the applicant Anil Kumar Gupta @ Bablu has been filed seeking the enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 289 of 2024, Under Sections 103 (1), 238 (3), 324 (6), 3 (5), 127 (6) of the BNS, P.S. Mainather, District Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant before the court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Moradabad, vide order dated 08.10.2024 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.08.2024.

3. Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel while pressing the bail plea of the applicant submits that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number due to ulterior motives. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the FIR giving rise to the instant case crime number was lodged against unknown persons initially under Sections 103 (1), 238, 324 (6) and 127 (6) BNS with the allegation that on 2 BAIL No. 9740 of 2025

16.08.2024 at about 8:00 p.m., the father of the informant (Deceased) had left home on his motorcycle bearing registration No. UP 21 BL 1907 and around 00:30 hours on 17.08.2024 (intervening night of 16.08.2024-17.08.2024) information was received that he had met with an accident and the dead body was at the District Hospital. On reaching the District Hospital the informant and his family members found injury marks on the neck of the deceased and his tongue was protuding out, there were tying marks on the hands of the deceased, head injury was also noticed and the informant was of firm belief that his father the deceased had been murdered by unknown persons and given a colour of an accident case.

4. It has also been argued that the FIR has been lodged after inordinate delay of 36 hours without any plausible cause explaining the delay. The post mortem of the deceased was conducted on

17.08.2024 at 12:55 p.m. and as many as 9 ante mortem injuries were noted on the body of the deceased. The cause of death reported was Asphyxia due to strangulation. The FIR was lodged after the conduct of the post mortem. The first informant in his statement under Section 180 BNSS has reiterated the FIR version and also stated that the Aadhar Card, Debit Card and a blank Cheque of the deceased was missing. The mobile phone of the deceased was recovered from the place of occurrence. The investigating officer also collected CCTV Footage from a camera installed at the Factory close to the incident site which revealed that two persons had dumped the body of the deceased from a Grand I-10 Car bearing registration No. UP 16 DA 6222 registered in the name of one Haroon Iqbal Gafoori. The said car was later on transferred in the name of Manoj Kumar. Investigation further revealed that two persons were involved in the commission of the crime. Co-accused Manoj was found to be using the vehicle in question and had used his identity card to exempt himself from a toll plaza. The identity of the applicant was also revealed from the photograph extracted from the CCTV Footage. The applicant and other co-accused persons i.e. Manoj Kumar and Smt. Veerbala 3 BAIL No. 9740 of 2025 Yadav were arrested from the car bearing registration No. UP16 DA 6222 and a Aadhar Card, Credit Card and a blank Cheque belonging to the deceased was recovered from the car. The confessional statement of the accused persons has revealed the deceased used to extracted money from co-accused Manoj Yadav and there was also on affair of the applicant with co-accused Smt. Veerbala Yadav and that the deceased used to speak ill of the applicant in front of her. A recovery of rope, a will deed and death certificate of the the father of the deceased has been made on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused Manoj Yadav. The independent witnesses Pushpendra Singh, Arun Kumar and Ankit Kumar @ Yogesh have stated in their statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS that they had seen the accused persons and established their complicity.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the only evidence against the applicant is the confessional statement of the co-accused which cannot be read against the applicant. The recovery is also from the car which does not belong to the applicant. There is no material evidence to connect the applicant with the crime. It has been submitted that the charge sheet against the applicant has already been filed and the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. It is submitted that the applicant will cooperate with the trial and shall not abuse the liberty granted if released on bail. Hence prayer for bail is made.

6. Per contra, Sri Puneet Kumar Singh, learned AGA as also Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the bail application by submitting that there is cogent and clinching evidence against the applicant. The delay in lodging the FIR is not fatal to the prosecution. The complicity of the applicant stands established from the evidence collected. The prosecution witnesses Pushpendra Singh, Arun Kumar and Ankit Kumar @ Yogesh have categorically seen the applicant and the deceased in the I-10 car. The testimony of the said witnesses cannot be 4 BAIL No. 9740 of 2025 doubted. The accused persons have attempted to show a planned murder as an accident. Admittedly, the motorcycle of the deceased does not reflect occurrence of any accident. The recovery of one Aadhar Card, one Credit Card and a Blank Cheque belonging to the deceased from the possession of the accused persons including the applicant from the I-10 car at the time of arrest cannot be doubted being in close proximity of the incident. It has also been submitted that the bail application of the co-accused Veerbal Yadav has already been rejected by coordinate Bench of this Court.

7. Considering all the above, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is accordingly rejected. August 27, 2025 v.k.updh. (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Mohit Behari Mathur, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

2. The instant Bail Application U/S 483 of the BNSS at the instance of the applicant Anil Kumar Gupta @ Bablu has been filed seeking the enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 289 of 2024, Under Sections 103 (1), 238 (3), 324 (6), 3 (5), 127 (6) of the BNS, P.S. Mainather, District Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant before the court below was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Moradabad, vide order dated 08.10.2024 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.08.2024.

3. Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel while pressing the bail plea of the applicant submits that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number due to ulterior motives. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the FIR giving rise to the instant case crime number was lodged against unknown persons initially under Sections 103 (1), 238, 324 (6) and 127 (6) BNS with the allegation that on 2 BAIL No. 9740 of 2025

16.08.2024 at about 8:00 p.m., the father of the informant (Deceased) had left home on his motorcycle bearing registration No. UP 21 BL 1907 and around 00:30 hours on 17.08.2024 (intervening night of 16.08.2024-17.08.2024) information was received that he had met with an accident and the dead body was at the District Hospital. On reaching the District Hospital the informant and his family members found injury marks on the neck of the deceased and his tongue was protuding out, there were tying marks on the hands of the deceased, head injury was also noticed and the informant was of firm belief that his father the deceased had been murdered by unknown persons and given a colour of an accident case.

4. It has also been argued that the FIR has been lodged after inordinate delay of 36 hours without any plausible cause explaining the delay. The post mortem of the deceased was conducted on

17.08.2024 at 12:55 p.m. and as many as 9 ante mortem injuries were noted on the body of the deceased. The cause of death reported was Asphyxia due to strangulation. The FIR was lodged after the conduct of the post mortem. The first informant in his statement under Section 180 BNSS has reiterated the FIR version and also stated that the Aadhar Card, Debit Card and a blank Cheque of the deceased was missing. The mobile phone of the deceased was recovered from the place of occurrence. The investigating officer also collected CCTV Footage from a camera installed at the Factory close to the incident site which revealed that two persons had dumped the body of the deceased from a Grand I-10 Car bearing registration No. UP 16 DA 6222 registered in the name of one Haroon Iqbal Gafoori. The said car was later on transferred in the name of Manoj Kumar. Investigation further revealed that two persons were involved in the commission of the crime. Co-accused Manoj was found to be using the vehicle in question and had used his identity card to exempt himself from a toll plaza. The identity of the applicant was also revealed from the photograph extracted from the CCTV Footage. The applicant and other co-accused persons i.e. Manoj Kumar and Smt. Veerbala 3 BAIL No. 9740 of 2025 Yadav were arrested from the car bearing registration No. UP16 DA 6222 and a Aadhar Card, Credit Card and a blank Cheque belonging to the deceased was recovered from the car. The confessional statement of the accused persons has revealed the deceased used to extracted money from co-accused Manoj Yadav and there was also on affair of the applicant with co-accused Smt. Veerbala Yadav and that the deceased used to speak ill of the applicant in front of her. A recovery of rope, a will deed and death certificate of the the father of the deceased has been made on the pointing out of the applicant and co-accused Manoj Yadav. The independent witnesses Pushpendra Singh, Arun Kumar and Ankit Kumar @ Yogesh have stated in their statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS that they had seen the accused persons and established their complicity.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the only evidence against the applicant is the confessional statement of the co-accused which cannot be read against the applicant. The recovery is also from the car which does not belong to the applicant. There is no material evidence to connect the applicant with the crime. It has been submitted that the charge sheet against the applicant has already been filed and the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. It is submitted that the applicant will cooperate with the trial and shall not abuse the liberty granted if released on bail. Hence prayer for bail is made.

6. Per contra, Sri Puneet Kumar Singh, learned AGA as also Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the bail application by submitting that there is cogent and clinching evidence against the applicant. The delay in lodging the FIR is not fatal to the prosecution. The complicity of the applicant stands established from the evidence collected. The prosecution witnesses Pushpendra Singh, Arun Kumar and Ankit Kumar @ Yogesh have categorically seen the applicant and the deceased in the I-10 car. The testimony of the said witnesses cannot be 4 BAIL No. 9740 of 2025 doubted. The accused persons have attempted to show a planned murder as an accident. Admittedly, the motorcycle of the deceased does not reflect occurrence of any accident. The recovery of one Aadhar Card, one Credit Card and a Blank Cheque belonging to the deceased from the possession of the accused persons including the applicant from the I-10 car at the time of arrest cannot be doubted being in close proximity of the incident. It has also been submitted that the bail application of the co-accused Veerbal Yadav has already been rejected by coordinate Bench of this Court.

7. Considering all the above, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is accordingly rejected. August 27, 2025 v.k.updh. (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad