High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:169494 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35245 of 2023 Applicant :- Arun Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nagesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Nagesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.219 of 2023, under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, Police Station Harduaganj, District Aligarh during pendency of the trial.
Legal Reasoning
4. FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons and according to the FIR, in the night of 11.5.2023 some unknown persons committed murder of the son of informant.
Legal Reasoning
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR and during investigation when first statement of the informant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.then also he did not disclose the name of any accused including the applicant but when his second statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded then he disclosed the name of the applicant and his nephew and stated that nephew of the applicant was having some relationship with Neha his (sister-in-law ) and deceased also used to talk with Neha and only due to this reason Santosh, i.e., nephew of the applicant along with applicant, i.e., his uncle committed murder of the deceased. 6. He further submits that during investigation Investigating Officer recorded the statements of Bhupendra @ Bhanu and Sanjay Master @ Prashant Kumare and they have stated that they witnessed the applicant and co-accused Santosh along with the deceased on 10.5.2023but they did not even disclose the time when they witnessed them and, therefore, merely on the basis of evidence of these two witnesses also it cannot be said that applicant was last seen along with deceased. 7. He further submits that bail application of co-accused Santosh, the principal accused the nephew of the applicant has been allowed by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.7.2023 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No. 33218 of 2023 and his bail order has been annexed as Annexure-10 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application. 8. He further submits that the case of applicant is at par with co- accused Santosh. 9. He further argued that although as per prosecution when applicant was arrested then he confessed his guilt and on his pointing out one rope was recovered but merely on the basis of recovery of rope it cannot be said that applicant committed murder of the deceased. 10. He further submits that although applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but he has explained his criminal history in the affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed in support of the present bail application and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.5.2023. 11. Per contra learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and in the second statement of the informant the name of applicant along with his nephew Santosh was surfaced on the basis of suspicion and informant in his second statement also stated that Bhupendra @ Bhanu and Sanjay Master @ Prashant Kumare. informed him that they witnessed applicant and co-accused Santosh, who is nephew of the applicant, with the deceased on the date of incident. 14. Further, when the statment of Bhupendra @ Bhanu and Sanjay Master @ Prashant Kumare were recorded by Investigating Officer during investigation then they stated that on 10.5.2023 they witnessed the applicant and co-accused Santosh along with deceased but no time was mentioned by both the witnesses when they witnessed the applicant and deceased. 15. Further, although during investigation it is alleged that on the pointing out of applicant one rope was recovered but merely on the basis of recovery of rope it cannot be said that applicant participated in the crime. 16. Further, bail application of co-accused Santosh Kumar has already been allowed by Coordinate Bench of this Court and on merit the case of applicant is at par with him. 17. Further, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the affidavit and supplementary affidavit filed in support of the present bail application and law is settled that merely on the basis of criminal history bail application should not be dismissed if otherwise case of bail is made out. 18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. bail. 19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 20. Let the applicant-Arun Kumar 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. 21. 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. 22. 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 :- 23.8.2023 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad