Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter and charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted.
Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant through Video Conferencing as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Kaiptan Bajpai @ Karuna Shankar for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 249 of 2020, under Section 364 I.P.C., Police Station Bihar, District Unnao, during trial.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.
It is further submitted that in the F.I.R. only an apprehension has been made by the informant that the crime might have been committed by the applicant and other co-accused persons, however, informant Rohini Devi is not an eye witness.
It is further submitted that it is a case where the enmity between the parties is an established fact and the instant F.I.R. has been filed only to pressurize the applicant and other co-accused persons. There are material contradictions in the statement of the informant Rohini Devi recorded on 02.10.2020 and the statement of star witness Karan recorded under Section 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. wherein he has claimed that he had accompanied the victim on a bicycle to some distance and thereafter the victim had alighted from his bicycle near a pond. The star witness Karan in his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has corroborated his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and if the statement of this main prosecution witness is believed on its face value, nothing has been stated by him against the applicant.
It is further submitted that the investigating officer during the course of investigation has recorded the statement of an independent witness namely Ram Naresh, who claimed to have seen the informant Rohini Devi at 3:30 pm. on 02.10.2020 at a 'Mazar' with the victim which belies the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
It is also submitted that the material/evidence collected by the investigating officer during the course of investigation is so weak that it will be impossible for the prosecution to secure conviction at the trial. The applicant is detained in prison in this case since 11.10.2020 without any criminal antecedents and the other co-accused persons of the crime standing on the identical footing as of the applicant namely Sundara Lodh, Anita Trivedi, Saroj Trivedi and Harshit Bajpai have been released on bail by co-ordinate Benches of this court as well as by this court, vide orders dated 17.02.2021, 09.03.2021, 16.03.2021 and 24.03.2021 passed in Bail Nos. 2056 of 2021, 2333 of 2021, 3153 of 2021 and Bail No. 2222 of 2021, respectively and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail she may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted.
Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant was instrumental in kidnapping the victim for the purpose of committing his murder and, therefore, having regard to the seriousness of the offence, he is not entitled to be released on bail. However, he could not confront the fact that other co-accused persons standing on the similar footing have been released on bail by this court as well as by the co-ordinate Benches of this court.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the informant side as well as the applicant' side are inimical towards each other. Similarly placed co-accused persons namely Sundara Lodh, Anita Trivedi, Saroj Trivedi and Harshit Bajpai standing on the identical footing as of the applicant have been released on bail by this court and co-ordinate Bench of this court. Applicant is in jail in this matter since 11.10.2020 without any previous criminal antecedents. Charge-sheet in the matter has already been filed. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that there are material contradictions in the statement of informant Rohini Devi and star witness Karan and having regard to the statement of Ram Naresh who is an independent witness, the contention of the informant could not be believed.
Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I find substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant for the purpose of releasing the applicant on bail. The bail application is, thus, allowed.
Let the applicant- Kaiptan Bajpai @ Karuna Shankar involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall have not bearing on the fate of trial of this case.
Order Date :- 13.4.2021 Praveen