Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:55041
Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42722 of
2022
Applicant :- Sudesh Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for applicant and Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A.
2. Applicant has approached this Court for bail arising out of Case Crime No. 1053 of 2021 under Sections 120- B, 302, 201, 419, 420 I.P.C., Police Station- Loni Border, District- Ghaziabad.
3. In case at hand, according to prosecution, one Manish Kumar informed about recovery of an unknown dead body found in a dilapidated condition and accordingly, above referred FIR was lodged on 02.12.2021 against unknown persons.
4. Inquest of dead body was conducted, however, due to bad condition, it was not recognized but an Aadhar Card was recovered from clothes of dead body which was issued in name of applicant.
5. As per post mortem report, death was caused by coma due to head injury.
6. Applicant's wife and son have identified dead body of her husband/his father. It was handed over to her for last rituals.
7. On 06.12.2021 i.e after two weeks, CD No. 5 was
1
recorded that recovered dead body was wrongly identified to be applicant by his wife and son. The applicant was alive.
8. During investigation, applicant made a confessional statement that he was earlier involved in a case of honour killing of his daughter, therefore, he hatched a conspiracy to show himself as dead and for that he called deceased and one another to his house for purpose of construction and later on he caused death to deceased. Deceased was identified as a person named as Doman Ravidas. He also disclosed that he hatched a conspiracy in order to come out from clutches of police in case of honour killing and he has intentionally placed his Aadhar Card in pocket of clothes of deceased.
9. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is made accused only on basis of his confessional statement which is not admissible during trial; there is no eye witness account; prosecution story is highly improbable; it has come during investigation that deceased and his wife had last telephonic conversation on 20.11.2021 at about 7.30 PM whereas according to prosecution story, he was murdered on 19.11.2021.
10. Learned counsel also refers averments taken in paragraph 31 of application which is quoted below -:
"31. That the applicant is innocent but the police of police station concern falsely implicated him due to non fullfilment of their illegal demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- in collusion with accused persons committed murder of his daughter."
11. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that it is a case of a criminal mind hatching a conspiracy which was executed in a planned manner that applicant in order to come out from criminal case of honour killing not only caused murder of Doman Ravidas but also tried to show
2
that it was dead body of applicant. Wife and son of applicant have also participated in conspiracy as they have wrongly identified dead body of deceased Doman Ravidas to be of her husband/his father. Weapon used in committing crime was also recovered on pointing out of applicant.
12. I have considered the above mentioned rival submissions in referred factual and legal background and in view of established principle of jurisprudence of bail i.e 'bail is rule and jail is exception' as well as relevant factors for consideration of an bail application such as (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused;(vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; (viii) danger of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail etc. and that an order to grant or not to grant bail must assigned reasons (see Deepak Yadav vs State of U.P. (2022) 8 SCC 559, Manoj Kumar Khokar vs State of Rajasthan and Anr (2022) 3 SCC 501, The State of Jharkhand vs Dhananjay Gupta @ Dhananjay Prasad Gupta: Order dated 7.11.2023 in SLP(Crl) No.10810/2023 and Shiv Kumar Vs The State of U.P. and Ors : Order dated 12.9.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.2782 of 2023), therefore, I am of considered opinion that present is not a fit case to grant bail to applicant mainly on following reasons:-
(a). Applicant has hatched a conspiracy to show that he was murdered in order to come out from a criminal case lodged against him for committing offence of honour killing of his daughter;
3
(b). Applicant caused death of Doman Ravidas and in order to show that his dead body was of applicant, he placed his Aadhar Card in clothes of dead body.
(c). Applicant has caused disappearance of evidence. (d). If the applicant releases on bail, there would be reasonable apprehension of witness being influenced.
13. Accordingly, bail application is rejected.
14. Trial Court will take all endeavour to expedite the trial.
Order Date :- 1.4.2024 N. Sinha
4