Since these bail applications arise out of same case crime number, they have been heard together and are being decided by a common order. Criminal misc. bail application no.29444 of 2021 is being treated as a leading case.
Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State as well as Sri Mohd. Shadab Khan, holding brief of Sri Mohd. Sarwar Khan, learned counsel for the informant in both the applications and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have not committed the present offence. They have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the dead body of the deceased was said to be found in the baoli (a kind of well/pond). None has seen the incident. Although cycle and sleepers of the deceased are also said to be recovered from the place where the dead body of the deceased was lying, yet F.I.R. was lodged only on the basis of suspicion. There is also no evidence regarding the last seen of the deceased in the company of the applicants near the place of occurrence. Referring to the statement of witnesses including the family members of the deceased, it is further submitted that they have also not given any statement regarding the last seen evidence. They also expressed suspicion against the applicants for committing the present offence. Referring to the annexure no.4 to the leading bail application, it is next argued that there was a land dispute between the parties. A civil decree for partition of the agricultural land had been passed. Informant side were not vacating the land. Coercive orders were passed by the competent authority for taking possession of the land. Due to this reason, the informant side, on the basis of false facts and suspicion only, implicated the applicants for committing the present offence. Referring to the CDR (call detail record) collected by the investigating officer, it is further contended that this evidence is also not conclusive to implicate the applicants in this matter. It is further argued that CDR evidence is not admissible in evidence. If CDR is taken into consideration, then also location of the applicants was found at distinct place. Since the place of incident and the residence of the applicants as well as the deceased are same village, therefore, on the basis of CDR, applicants cannot be implicated in this matter. There is no other evidence to connect the applicants with this matter. Motive suggested against the applicants is also not sufficient to connect him with this matter. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 1.4.2021 having no criminal antecedents. In case applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that there was motive against the applicants to commit the present offence, as a civil dispute was pending between the parties. Call detail record also clearly demonstrates the location of the applicants near the place of incident. A young boy was done to death due to civil litigation. From the motive suggested by the informant, it cannot be presumed that applicants and applicants only have committed the present offence.
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, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., statement of witnesses, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail applications are allowed.
Let applicants Ravindra @ Kanhaiya Lal and Arvind Kumar @ Motilal involved in Case Crime No.36 of 2021 under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Sujanganj, District - Jaunpur 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 applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
4. The applicants 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 :- 26.8.2021 ss