High Court · 2025

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that it is not a case of direct evidence and the chain of circumstantial evidence is not complete. He next added that infact the dead body of the deceased was recovered on the pointing out of Sunil Rawat, brother-in-law of the applicant and his wife and the applicant has no role. He submits that only on the basis of extra judicial confession, the applicant is implicated and except apart, there is no evidence against him. He next submits that the applicant has two cases criminal history, out of which, in one of the case, he has been acquitted and in another case, the chargesheet has been submitted, wherein the name of the present applicant is not indicated. He added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 10-12-2024 and his role is distinguishable from the role of other co- accused persons.Further submitted that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that though, it is an admitted fact that there is a missing report on behest of the informant, but, later on, during the course of investigation, three accused persons, Sunil Rawat, his wife, Radha Devi and the present applicant were found involved in committing the offence and on the pointing out of Sunil Rawat and Radha Devi, the dead body of the deceased was recovered. He added that the motive is apparent in so far as Sunil Rawat and Radha Devi is concerned. He next added that the applicant has two cases criminal history and the chargesheet has been filed after thorough investigation, wherein all the accused persons including the present applicant were found involved in committing the offence and as such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the missing report was lodged and thereafter, the dead body was recovered on the pointing out of the co-accused persons, Sunil Rawat and Radha Devi and the applicant is implicated only on the basis of extra judicial confession and no specific role has been assigned by the Investigating OfÏcer, while collecting the evidences. This court has also taken note of the fact that there seems to be no direct motive of the present applicant to commit murder of the deceased. Further, the applicant has two cases criminal history, which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 10-12-2024 and the role of the applicant is distinguishable from the role of the other co-accused persons coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Kuldeep Rawat, involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that it is not a case of direct evidence and the chain of circumstantial evidence is not complete. He next added that infact the dead body of the deceased was recovered on the pointing out of Sunil Rawat, brother-in-law of the applicant and his wife and the applicant has no role. He submits that only on the basis of extra judicial confession, the applicant is implicated and except apart, there is no evidence against him. He next submits that the applicant has two cases criminal history, out of which, in one of the case, he has been acquitted and in another case, the chargesheet has been submitted, wherein the name of the present applicant is not indicated. He added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 10-12-2024 and his role is distinguishable from the role of other co- accused persons.Further submitted that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that though, it is an admitted fact that there is a missing report on behest of the informant, but, later on, during the course of investigation, three accused persons, Sunil Rawat, his wife, Radha Devi and the present applicant were found involved in committing the offence and on the pointing out of Sunil Rawat and Radha Devi, the dead body of the deceased was recovered. He added that the motive is apparent in so far as Sunil Rawat and Radha Devi is concerned. He next added that the applicant has two cases criminal history and the chargesheet has been filed after thorough investigation, wherein all the accused persons including the present applicant were found involved in committing the offence and as such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the missing report was lodged and thereafter, the dead body was recovered on the pointing out of the co-accused persons, Sunil Rawat and Radha Devi and the applicant is implicated only on the basis of extra judicial confession and no specific role has been assigned by the Investigating OfÏcer, while collecting the evidences. This court has also taken note of the fact that there seems to be no direct motive of the present applicant to commit murder of the deceased. Further, the applicant has two cases criminal history, which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 10-12-2024 and the role of the applicant is distinguishable from the role of the other co-accused persons coupled with the fact that he has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Kuldeep Rawat, involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench