Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3802 of 2021 Applicant :- Rajendra Agrahari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Exemption application is allowed.
Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant Rajendra Agrahari involved in case crime no.378 of 2019 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Khuldabad, District Prayagraj.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has not committed the present offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that entire prosecution case is based on the statement of the informant and the landlady. In fact, informant was a married lady having three children. She left her first husband and two children and started living with the applicant in live-in relationship along with the minor daughter (deceased). Referring to the statement of landlady, it is further argued that hot-talks were exchanged between the informant and the applicant in the night. If this fact is true, then why she went to sleep in the room of landlady. Conduct of the informant itself shows that she has planned the murder of the deceased in order to falsely implicate the applicant. Articles and money belonging to the applicant were also stolen by the person, who has conducted the murder of the deceased. It is next argued that several grievous injuries were also received by the applicant in the said incident. Had he been committed the present offence, why he would have sustained injuries. At this stage, learned counsel has referred to the medical evidence and argued that there are no eyewitness accounts in this matter. If entire prosecution case is taken into consideration, then also no prima facie case is made out. Applicant was under treatment for about 17 days in the hospital. Anyhow he has recovered. Matter is pending since 2019. Case has not been committed till today. No one appeared to support the prosecution case. It is further argued that knives were also recovered from the concerned house, but same were not recovered on pointing out of the applicant. Learned counsel further argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.12.2019 having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the informant and the landlady both can be treated as eye account witnesses. Applicant and the deceased both were locked together in a room and deceased was done to death by the applicant. Mere sleeping of the informant in the room of landlady will not be sufficient to disbelieve her statement. Since there are eye account witnesses in the matter, 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 and gravity of the offence, complicity of the accused, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., statement of witnesses, medical evidence, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. The bail application is rejected.
However, the Magistrate concerned is hereby directed to commit the case to the Court of Session for trial. Trial court is also hereby directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, fixing short dates, preferably on day-to-day basis.
Order Date :- 12.8.2021 / ss