Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8615 of 2018 Applicant :- Aditya @ Babloo @ Shuab Qureshi Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Prasad Mishra,Sheshadri Trivedi,Zia Naz Zaidi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Babu Dubey Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
None has appeared on behalf of the informant in the revised call.
Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Sheshadri Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed the present offence. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant on the basis of suspicion. If entire prosecution case is taken into consideration, then also deceased Neha was seen along with one Ankit. Thereafter, at no point of time, she was seen with the applicant. Dead body was recovered on 7.7.2017, thereafter F.I.R. was lodged. Referring to the statement of the witness Ankit, it is further argued that this fact that deceased Neha was along with him in the market and thereafter she went to her office has not been disclosed in the F.I.R. Thus, chain of circumstantial evidence to connect the applicant with the deceased of the deceased Neha is not fully complete and linked to form an irresistible conclusion against the applicant. Referring to the confessional statement of the co-accused, it is further argued that the same cannot be read in evidence. Recovery is false, planted and is not supported by any independent evidence. Referring to the confessional statement of the applicant, it is further argued that recovery of ashes and bones said to be belonging to deceased Suman Lata is also not clear till today whether said bones belong to human body or not. There is no independent evidence to connect the applicant with the said recovery. No DNA report has been filed till today in this matter. Referring to the entire evidence annexed with the applicant, it is further argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.4.2017 having no criminal antecedents. Till date, prosecution has not examined any witness. There is no chance of early conclusion of the trial. None has witnessed the incident. Entire prosecution case is based on circumstances evidence. Circumstances are not linked with each other against the applicant. Thus, prayer for bail has been made. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and argued that recovery of ashes and bones belonging to the deceased Suman Lata has been made on pointing out of the applicant. Referring to the confessional statement of co-accused Najish, vehicle said to have been used in throwing the dead body of the deceased Neha has also been recovered in the matter. Thus, there is ample evidence against the applicant to connect him with this matter. Deceased Neha had gone on the motorcycle of the applicant to her house. Thereafter, her dead body was recovered. On query being made by the family members of the deceased Neha, applicant had not given any specific answer regarding the whereabouts of the deceased. Thus, a prima facie case is made out against the applicant.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused as well as the detention period of the applicant and the fact that the present case rests on circumstantial evidence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Aditya @ Babloo @ Shuab Qureshi involved in Case Crime No.103 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 364, 368, 376, 419, 404 IPC, Police Station Lalkurti, District - Meerut be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
The party shall file self attested computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad. The concerned Court / Authority / Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 24.9.2021 ss