Heard Sri Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinay Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri I.S. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State.
This Bail Application (under Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 135 of 2020 under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., P.S. Eka, District Firozabad.
As per F.I.R. which has been lodged by one Vipin Kumar Yadav, who is not related to deceased, had found the dead-body lying by the side of canal on 9.08.2020 at about 6:00 a.m., the said body was identified as that of father of Yogendra Singh who had moved an application addressed to S.H.O., P.S., Eka, District Firozabad dated 14.08.2020 wherein he has stated that on 8.08.2020, his father (deceased), Rajendra Singh had gone to attend panchayat near Jasrana petrol pump and from there, he came to his sister's place and remained there till 5:00 p.m. and Yogendra Singh had returned home leaving him there only, thereafter he tried to contact him on his mobile phone but the same was switched off; on 14.08.2020, he came through electronic media about a dead-body to whom he recognized from clothes and other belongings as of his father.
In Post-mortem report, cause of death could not be ascertained; only three abrasions and one contusion are found to have been sustained by the deceased. Body of the deceased was in highly decomposed condition as rigor mortis has occurred all over the body and period of death was recorded as three-four days. Post-mortem of the deceased was conducted on 12.08.2020.
It has been argued on behalf of the learned counsel for the accused applicant that accused applicant has been falsely implicated in this case; his name has come during investigation on the basis of confessional statement and the extra-judicial confession made before Sunita Devi who is stated to have been phoned by the accused and confessed that he had killed the deceased. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the possession of the applicant or from his pointing out. He is in jail since 30.08.2020; if the accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the bail. From the side of learned counsel for the informant, it has been argued that the Court must wait for the receipt of viscera report.
Looking to the fact that this is not a case of direct evidence as no one has seen the deceased being killed by the accused applicant, the evidence which has come is extra judicial confession and the motive is not strong, quantum of the punishment, nature of the offence, there are no chances of accused fleeing from justice and period of detention in jail, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Upendra @ Pintu involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. 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.
Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 A. Mandhani