High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50818 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11482 of 2025 Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Adesh Kumar,Barkha Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Sri Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 23 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Kankarkhera, District Meerut during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and co- accused Saudan Singh and Adarsh Gupta and according to the FIR marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant and on 08.01.2025 mother of the informant was in the house of the applicant and at about 1.50 PM co-accused Saudan Singh and Adarsh Gupta committed her murder by causing firearm injuries to her. It is further mentioned in the FIR that applicant also involved in the present crime. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is named in the FIR but even according to the FIR murder of the deceased was committed by co-accused Saudan Singh and Adarsh Gupta. He further submits, informant of the case is however not an eye witness. 5. He further submits, the alleged incident occurred in presence of wife of the applicant i.e. daughter of the deceased namely Nisha and when her statement was recorded during investigation then she stated that two persons, who after entering in her house committed the murder of her mother, were concealed their faces and from her statements it reflects, as there is matrimonial dispute is pending between her and applicant, therefore, she very casually also disclosed the name of applicant. 6. He further submits, during investigation on the basis of CCTV footage it was found that actually murder of the deceased was committed by Naveen @ Anuj Malik and Harvindar and applicant has been made accused in the present matter with the aid of Section 61(2) B.N.S. on the ground that both above named accused were relatives of the applicant. He further submits, except this and previous matrimonial dispute there is no other evidence against the applicant on record. 7. He further submits, merely on the ground that accused persons who caused firearm injuries to the deceased were relatives of the applicant, it cannot be said that applicant also involved along with them and hatched conspiracy. 8. He further submits, apart from the present case applicant is having criminal history of three cases but all the cases were lodged by the wife of the applicant only due to matrimonial dispute. 9. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 24.01.2025. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits, wife of the applicant is the eye witness of the incident and applicant also involved in hatching conspiracy of alleged crime but could not dispute the fact that there is no cogent evidence in this regard against the applicant and admittedly applicant did not cause any injury to the deceased rather from the investigation it was revealed that firearm injuries were caused by co-accused Naveen @ Anuj Malik and Harvindar. Learned AGA however further submitted that matrimonial dispute is pending between applicant and his wife and it is a case in which mother-in-law of the applicant was murdered. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, applicant is son-in-law of the deceased and he is also named in the FIR but it appears, on the basis of suspicion he has been made accused in the FIR. 13. Further, from the record, it also reflects, during investigation it was revealed that co-accused Naveen @ Anuj Malik and Harvindar committed the murder of the deceased by causing firearm injury and applicant has been made accused with the aid of Section 61(2) B.N.S. on the ground that he is close relative of both the above accused and his relationship with his wife was not cordial one and matrimonial dispute is pending both of them. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that even if applicant is having relationship with co- accused persons who caused firearm injuries to the deceased and matrimonial dispute is pending with his wife then also merely on this ground at this stage it cannot be said that he was involved in the murder of his mother-in-law. 14. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since 24.01.2025. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Deepak be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 18. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 19. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad