Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37435 of 2018 Applicant :- Ramakant @ Malali Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Srivastava,Neeraj Srivastava,Santosh Kumar Giri,Uday Bhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 28 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, P.S. Bithoor, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. As per prosecution version, the deceased was married with one Deepak, but after marriage there has been some matrimonial dispute between them and regarding that issue a case was registered against Deepak under Section Sections 498A, 420, 323, 406, 494 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act vide Crime No. 36 of 2010 and in that case the applicant was a witness. It was stated that deceased was a friend of daughter-in-law of his brother and earlier applicant was doing pairvi for the deceased and thus, applicant has absolutely no motive to commit murder of deceased. The applicant is not named in the first information report, which was lodged by Gram Pradhan stating that dead body of a lady has been found. After the said dead body was identified to be of deceased Arti, the first informant has submitted a tehrir before the police but applicant was not named therein and it was alleged in that tehrir that deceased was having dispute with her husband Deepak Sharma. Learned counsel submitted that involvement of applicant was shown on the basis of statement of shop owner where deceased was working and he has merely stated that on 01.02.2018 applicant was sitting in a car and that deceased has gone in the same car. It was submitted that said prosecution version is thoroughly false and improbable and in fact there is no evidence against the applicant. The alleged recovery of hanky and lipstick was shown from the applicant and two co-accused persons Chandra Kishore and Rajendra Kumar Gautam and both these co-accused have already been granted bail. Learned counsel submitted that applicant has absolutely no motive to cause death of deceased and in fact he was a well wisher of deceased. It has been further submitted that all the material witnesses have already been examined and that now the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.02.2018 and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has been stated that criminal history of 8 cases was shown against the applicant and the same has duly been explained and all these cases are quite old.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that there is 'last seen' evidence against the applicant and that recovery was also shown from applicant. It was also stated that there is criminal history of ten cases against the applicant and the trial of the case is at the advanced stage.
Perusal of record shows that there is 'last seen' evidence against the applicant. As per statement of owner of shop, namely, Pushkar Nath Mishra, where deceased used to work, on 01.02.218 deceased has gone in Tata Sumo car in which applicant and two other persons were sitting and on 02.02.2018 she did not come at the shop. As per prosecution version, on 02.02.2018 dead body of deceased was found. Further, there is criminal history of eight cases against the applicant. In view of these facts, applicant cannot claim parity with co-accused Chandra Kishore @ Shiv @ Mathura Pasi and Rajendra Kumar Gautam. Even in the bail order of co-accused Rajendra Kumar Gautam, the role of applicant has been distinguished from that of co-accused Rajendra Kumar Gautam.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant Ramakant @ Malali is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021/A. Tripathi