High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Ganesh Kumar Verma, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Hemant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This is the third bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the applicant- Chandu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 216 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Bardah, District- Azamgarh.

4. The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32233 of 2021 was dismissed for non prosecution by this Court vide order dated 12.11.2021. The second bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 51528 of 2021 was dismissed being incomplete and perfunctory by this Court vide order dated 10.7.2023.

5. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 12.09.2020 by Sub- Inspector Devlal Yadav under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C. against unknown person stating therein that on 09.09.2020 an application was received from Ashok Rai that dead body of a lady in 'sari' which is tied with rope and stone is lying under the Beso river bridge and it appeared that someone has thrown it. On the said information higher officers were informed and he with the other police personnels went there and found the dead body of an unknown lady lying there as stated in the application. The inquest of the same was conducted as that of unknown lady, after which it was sent for post mortem examination which was also conducted as unknown person. Further probe transpired that the deceased is Kumari Gunja the daughter of Ramachal and someone had murdered and concealed her body and threw her in the said condition. The inquest of the body was conducted as that of unknown lady and also the post mortem examination was conducted as that of unknown lady wherein a contusion was found on the front of the neck and hyoid bone was found to be fractured and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia due to ante mortem throttling.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no eye witness to the murder and also to the throwing of the dead body in the river. It is submitted that implication of the applicant has surfaced in the present matter in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of one Smt. Asha Devi the wife of Ram Awadh but the said witness has not been arrayed as a witness in the list of witnesses in the charge sheet, the said statement has been placed before the Court which is annexure no. 6 to the affidavit in support of this bail application. It is submitted that even therein only vague allegations have been levelled against the applicant that the deceased had love affair with the applicant and on 06.09.2020 in the evening she called the applicant to her house and pressed for marriage to which he was not ready and then the applicant pressed her mouth and neck and at the same time Ramachal the father of the deceased and Smt. Rampatti the mother of the deceased came there after which she was taken to the hospital but she has died on the way and then they threw her in the river. It is submitted that the same is a totally concocted and false version. It is submitted that Ramachal and Smt. Rampatti the father and the mother of the deceased respectively have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.8.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12123 of 2021, copy of the said order is annexure no. 7 to the affidavit in support of this bail application. It is submitted while placing para- 22 of the affidavit that nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para-24 of the affidavit and is in jail since 13.09.2020.

7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for bail.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown person. The applicant is not named therein. Subsequently implication of the applicant has surfaced in the statement of Smt. Asha Devi but she is not arrayed as witness in the charge sheet. Co-accused Ramachal and Smt. Rampatti the father and the mother of the deceased respectively have been granted bail.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Chandu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties 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 82 Cr.P.C., 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 174-A I.P.C. (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 313 Cr.P.C. 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 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.) NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Ganesh Kumar Verma, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Hemant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This is the third bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the applicant- Chandu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 216 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Bardah, District- Azamgarh.

4. The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 32233 of 2021 was dismissed for non prosecution by this Court vide order dated 12.11.2021. The second bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 51528 of 2021 was dismissed being incomplete and perfunctory by this Court vide order dated 10.7.2023.

5. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 12.09.2020 by Sub- Inspector Devlal Yadav under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C. against unknown person stating therein that on 09.09.2020 an application was received from Ashok Rai that dead body of a lady in 'sari' which is tied with rope and stone is lying under the Beso river bridge and it appeared that someone has thrown it. On the said information higher officers were informed and he with the other police personnels went there and found the dead body of an unknown lady lying there as stated in the application. The inquest of the same was conducted as that of unknown lady, after which it was sent for post mortem examination which was also conducted as unknown person. Further probe transpired that the deceased is Kumari Gunja the daughter of Ramachal and someone had murdered and concealed her body and threw her in the said condition. The inquest of the body was conducted as that of unknown lady and also the post mortem examination was conducted as that of unknown lady wherein a contusion was found on the front of the neck and hyoid bone was found to be fractured and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia due to ante mortem throttling.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no eye witness to the murder and also to the throwing of the dead body in the river. It is submitted that implication of the applicant has surfaced in the present matter in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of one Smt. Asha Devi the wife of Ram Awadh but the said witness has not been arrayed as a witness in the list of witnesses in the charge sheet, the said statement has been placed before the Court which is annexure no. 6 to the affidavit in support of this bail application. It is submitted that even therein only vague allegations have been levelled against the applicant that the deceased had love affair with the applicant and on 06.09.2020 in the evening she called the applicant to her house and pressed for marriage to which he was not ready and then the applicant pressed her mouth and neck and at the same time Ramachal the father of the deceased and Smt. Rampatti the mother of the deceased came there after which she was taken to the hospital but she has died on the way and then they threw her in the river. It is submitted that the same is a totally concocted and false version. It is submitted that Ramachal and Smt. Rampatti the father and the mother of the deceased respectively have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.8.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12123 of 2021, copy of the said order is annexure no. 7 to the affidavit in support of this bail application. It is submitted while placing para- 22 of the affidavit that nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para-24 of the affidavit and is in jail since 13.09.2020.

7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for bail.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown person. The applicant is not named therein. Subsequently implication of the applicant has surfaced in the statement of Smt. Asha Devi but she is not arrayed as witness in the charge sheet. Co-accused Ramachal and Smt. Rampatti the father and the mother of the deceased respectively have been granted bail.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Chandu, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties 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 82 Cr.P.C., 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 174-A I.P.C. (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 313 Cr.P.C. 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 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.) NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad