The Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused in a murder and kidnapping abducting case by applying the precedent laid down in Data Ram, citing the delay in implicating the applicant and lack of direct evidence against him.
Released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties with specified conditions.
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.
Court No. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5180 of 2021
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Indra Dev
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant through video conferencing. Learned A.G.A. is present in the Court. Learned counsel for the complainant is not present even in revised call.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Santosh Kumar Pal in connection with Case Crime No.677 of 2014, under Sections 363, 366, 302, 201 I.P.C. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Machhli Shahar, district Jaunpur.
The facts of this case starts from a gumshudgi report submitted by the complainant Suresh on 17.05.2014 in which the complainant has narrated that his sister Sarita is not traceable since 01.05.2014 and she might have gone somewhere else without informing to any of the family member. At this information the first information report was lodged at Case Crime No.677 of 2014 and investigation was started. Later on the dead body was found on 17.12.2014 and no one had identified the said dead body then the police submitted the final report on 10.06.2015. Thereafter, when the blood sample of the complainant was taken and it matched with the DNA of the dead body found, the name of the applicant has surfaced in another statements of the complainant and other witnesses.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. She submitted that the name of the applicant and other co-accused persons were not disclosed by the complainant and other witnesses recorded earlier. She submitted that after a gap of six years and seven month the police has recorded the confessional statement of the applicant and on the basis of the said confessional statement the present applicant and other co-accused, they have been charge sheeted. She further submitted that there is no evidence against the applicant and other co-accused persons. She submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.12.2020, hence he is entitled to be released on bail and he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea but has not disputed the fact there is no evidence against the applicant and other co-accused persons and the name of the applicant and co-accused have surfaced after more than six years.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned
counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 , but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Santosh Kumar Pal involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;
v) The applicant 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
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 :- 22.6.2021
R./
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the delay in implicating him and the nature of charges.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P.Applied¶11
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 · Who else cites this
Santosh Kumar Pal
State of U.P.
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
