Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Firoz Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Karan @ Digvijay Singh for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 244 of 2019, under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149 IPC, relating to Police Station Maharajganj, District Faizabad, during trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing this bail application submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.
It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR nor he was named in the statement of the informant, who claimed himself to be an eye witness and his complicity has only been surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused persons Abhishek Singh and Aditya Singh recorded in the police custody, which could not be used against the applicant.
It is also submitted that even in the statement of another eye witness, namely, Sandeep Singh no role of the applicant has been mentioned nor his name has been taken by him and even the confessional statement of Aditya Singh and Abhishek Singh is believed his role is with regard to the fact that he had informed them telephonically about the departure of the deceased and this fact has not been corroborated by eye witnesses, namely, Ram Sagar and Sandeep Singh.
It is further submitted that specific role of firing with fire-arms has been assigned to co-accused persons Aditya Singh, Abhishek Singh and Bheem Singh and therefore the role of the instant applicant is distinguishable from the role of other co-accused persons.
It is further submitted that nature of evidence which has been collected by the Investigating Officer against the applicant is so weak that it is impossible for the prosecution to secure conviction of the applicant in trial. The applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in this matter since 21.7.2019. Charge sheet in this matter has also been submitted and there is no apprehension that the accused-applicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty.
Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed heinous offence in association with other co-accused persons and his complicity in the crime is evident and therefore he is not entitled to be released on bail.
Shri Firoz Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the informant/ complainant submits that the role of the instant applicant in the commission of the crime is evident as he was a part of a conspiracy in pursuance of which he had informed the actual assailants about the departure of the deceased from the Jim and therefore he is not entitled to be released on bail.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record including case diary, it is evident that the informant, namely, Ram Sagar Yadav, who had lodged the First Information Report has claimed himself to be the eye witness and has stated in the FIR as well as in his statement that Aditya Singh and Abhishek Singh and other unknown persons had dragged the deceased towards the Chitra Bisawan Road and co-accused Aditya Singh and Abhishek Singh had fired towards the deceased. On 18.7.2019 co-accused persons Aditya Singh and Abhishek Singh were arrested and stated to have confessed their guilt to the tune that they deputed applicant Karan @ Digvijay Singh to inform them about the departure of the deceased from the Jim and Karan telephonically informed them while co-accused Yogendra Pratap and Pulkit had caused the deceased fallen from his motorcycle and thereafter Aditya Singh, Abhishek Singh and Bheem Singh had fired at the deceased and killed him. On the pointing of Aditya Singh and Abhishek Singh 3 empty cartridges were recovered. It is also a case of the prosecution that on 21.7.2019 applicant- Karan @ Digvijay Singh was arrested and confessed that he signalled the departure of the deceased from the Jim by lighting the torch. The Investigating Officer has also collected the whats app chat of the mobile phone of Karan which only shows that he has witnessed the murder. On 24.7.2019 statement of Jim owner, Sandeep Singh was recorded, wherein he specifically assigned the role of firing to co-accused persons Abhishek Singh, Aditya Singh and Bheem Singh and the role of exhortation has been assigned to co-accused Pulkit and Shalu. On the pointing of Bheem Singh a country made pistol and motorcycle Platina was recovered in front of independent witness. Eye witness- Sandeep Singh has also identified Bheem Singh as one of the assailants while he was being taken in police custody remand. There are many independent witnesses who have seen Aditya Sigh, Abhishek Singh and Bheem Singh going on their motorcycle waving country made pistols after the commission of the alleged crime.
It has been overwhelmingly submitted by learned cousnel for the applicant that there are only two eye witnesses of the crime, namely, Ram Sagar Yadav and Sandeep Singh. Eye witness Ram Sagar Yadav has assigned the role of firing to Aditya Singh and Abhishek Singh while Sandeep Singh has assigned the role of firing to three persons and later on identified Bheem Singh as the third person who was firing at the deceased along with Abhishek and Aditya Singh.
It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the role of only providing information of the departure of the deceased from the Jim has been assigned to applicant- Karan in the confessional statement of co-accused person Aditya and Abhishek which could not be believed in the back ground of the fact that in the statement of eye witnesses Ram Sagar Yadav and Sandeep Singh no role of any kind has been assigned to the applicant.
Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, I find force in the submissions of learned counsel for applicant only for the purpose of releasing the applicant on bail. The bail application is, thus, allowed.
Let the applicant - Karan @ Digvijay Singh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on 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.
Observations made herein above are only for the purpose of this bail and would have no effect on the fate of trial.
Order Date :- 22.2.2021 Muk