Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13023 of 2021 Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhishek Tiwari
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 668 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120B, 34, P.S. Modinagar, District Ghaziabad, 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 been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been stated that in first information report, eight accused persons including the applicant, have been named and it has been alleged that all the named accused persons including the applicant, have made indiscriminate firing at the son of first informant and it was also stated that firing was made in pursuance of common object of all the accused persons, which clearly indicate that first informant has claimed himself an eye-witness but during investigation, he has changed his version and stated that now he came to know that applicant and co-accused Sappu Gurjar @ Ankush were in Mandoli Jail, Delhi, as before the incident, they have got their bail cancelled from Delhi Court and went to jail. Learned counsel submitted that the statement of first informant, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as his supplementary statement, clearly shows that first informant was desperate to name the applicant in this case. It was further submitted that regarding alleged CCTV footage, wherein as per prosecution version, an amount of Rs. 5 lacs was withdrawn by the mother-in-law of applicant from bank, would not automatically show that applicant has given that amount to any of the co- accused to murder the deceased. Learned counsel has also referred the charge- sheet, submitted by the police in this case, and pointed out that none of the witness cited in the charge-sheet, is eye-witness of incident and thus, the case is based on circumstantial evidence. Referring to statement of first informant, it has been submitted that the entire attending facts and circumstances show that there is no eye-witness of alleged incident and at the time of alleged incident applicant was in jail and as the first informant was desperate to implicate the applicant, thus, the first informant has changed his version for several times and all these facts make the involvement of applicant thoroughly doubtful. There is no evidence that applicant was involved in any conspiracy to commit murder of deceased. It has been further submitted that criminal history of three cases has been shown against the applicant, which has duly been explained in supplementary affidavit. It was also stated that co-accused Smt. Ruby has already been granted bail co-ordinate Bench of Court vide order dated 12.02.2021, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44841 of 2020. Lastly, it was submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.08.2020, having no criminal history and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that before this incident, in pursuance to the conspiracy, applicant has got cancelled his bail in some earlier case from Delhi Court and on 18.08.2020 he went to Mandoli Jail, Delhi and thereafter this incident was committed on 24.08.2020. It has been submitted that there is evidence that an amount of Rs. 5 lacs was withdrawn by co-accused Smt. Aruna from her account and at that time applicant, who is son-in-law of said Aruna, was with her and that while the amount was being withdrawn from bank, co- accused Anurag Tyagi with shooters was seen in the car and they were doing 'reki' and the description of CCTV footage to this effect has been mentioned in affidavit of compliance filed by the State. It has been further submitted that deceased Akshay was involved in murder of brother-in-law of applicant, who is son of co-accused Aruna, thus, the applicant has motive for murder of deceased and from the statement of co-accused persons as well as of witnesses, it is apparent that applicant is a main conspirator and in pursuance to the conspiracy he got cancelled his bail in an old case pending against him in Delhi Court and he went to Mandoli jail Delhi on 24.08.2020. It was further submitted that there is criminal history of two cases against the applicant and he is stated in jail in both those cases. It was also submitted that role of co-accused Smt. Aruna was also shown in the conspiracy and her bail has already been rejected by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.08.2021, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.21316 of 2021 and that case of applicant is on similar footing.
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 Vikas is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 6.10.2021 A. Tripathi