Court rejected second bail application in murder case. Bail of co-accody was vacated by SC after recording specific evidence, resulting in charge against applicant. Considering gravity and specificity of allegations, bail rejected.
Application for bail denied; accused remains in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49309 of 2018 Applicant :- Gurmeeet Singh @ Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Goyal,Samit Gopal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Samit Gopal,Swetashwa Agarwal Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Samit Gopal, learned senior counsel for the applicant Gurmeeet Singh @ Raju and Km. Meena, learned A. G. A. for the State as well as Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the complainant.
Applicant has moved the present second bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No.384 of 2015 u/s 147,148,149,302, 307, 341, 504 IPC PS Qutabsher District Saharanpur. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.3.2017.
Contention of the learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant in the second bail application is that in the FIR general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. He places reliance upon the bail order of co-accused Gurupratap Singh alias Hunny who was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.1.2017. The bail was granted on the following ground:
?kVuk ds le; HkwisUnz flag c=k vius gkFk esa yksgs dh ,axy fy;s Fkk ftlls mlus eq>s rFkk esjs yMds dks ekjk FkkA rFkk lUuh vius gkFk esa d`ik.k fy;s Fkk ftlls lUuh us esjs yMds deZohj ds mij izgkj fd;s Fks ftlls esjk yMdk ej x;kA
The Court has been informed that against the order granting bail to co-accused Gurupratap Singh alias Hunny, the first informant has filed a SLP before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court has passed the following order on 17.2.2017:
“Heard learned counsel for the parties.
We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned
2
order. However, we direct that since evidence is going on, the statement of eye witnesses be recorded as far as possible within a period of one month and thereafter respondent no.2 be released in pursuance of the impugned order.
The special leave petition is disposed of.
Pending application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.”
Thus, contention is that the Hon'ble Apex Court has not cancelled the bail granted to co-accused Gurupratap Singh alias Hunny but passed a specific order that the respondent be released on bail after the evidence of eye witnesses is recorded. It has now come on record as contended by the learned counsel for the first informant that the eye witnesses' evidence has been recorded, the same being that of Satpal Singh, copy of which has been annexed as AnnexureSA-5 to the supplementary affidavit dated 12.12.2018 and the evidence of PW-2 Anil Kumar Sethi, relevant portion of which has been annexed at page 215 of the said supplementary affidavit, in which specific role has been assigned to the present applicant Gurmeeet Singh @ Raju.
In view of the said statements recorded after the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court and in view of the fact that the son of the first informant who happens to be an Advocate was doing pairavi against the accused persons and thus, he was killed by them and, looking to the seriousness of the allegation as made in the FIR, gravity of offence and the severity of punishment, no case for grant of any indulgence is made out.
Accordingly, the application for bail is rejected.
The Court has also been informed that a bail cancellation application has also been with regard to bail granted to co-accused who has been granted bail by this Court.
Order Date :- 22.5.2019 SP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail of a second accused should be granted when co-accused bail has been superseded by specific evidence requirements and when FIR alleges role in killing an advocate.
Whether change in role of co-accused to specific role after recording of evidence makes out a case for bail.
Gurmeeet Singh @ Raju
Vipin Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
