In a bail application involving murder and other IPC offences, the Single Judge granted bail after finding the case depended entirely on circumstantial last-seen evidence that collapsed due to witness discharge and hostility.
Applicant Moharpal released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount.
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. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9647 of 2021
Applicant :- Moharpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant who is present virtually through video conferencing and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been given by the accused applicantMoharpal, in Case Crime No. 69 of 2020, under Section 302, 201, 406 I.P.C., P.S.- Kasganj, District - Kasganj, with further prayer to release him on bail during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further submission is that the F.I.R. was lodged against the accused-applicant by Rohan Lal, in which it was stated that on relevant date the accused-applicant was seen going with the deceased and Guddo Devi, Ashok Kumar, Sanju and Pati Ram saw them. The deceased did not return and subsequently, her dead body was found at some place and regarding that an information was given by one Sharif Ahmad in the concerned police station. The entry about the information is annexed at Page No. 28 of the bail application. Submission of the learned counsel is that the case is totally based on circumstantial evidence and there is only evidence of last seen as alleged in the F.I.R.
Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that after filing of the charge sheet, the trial commenced and the informant was examined who supported the F.I.R. version but he is not the witness of any material fact. Further submission is that in the statement of informant, the name of Guddo Devi, Ashok Kumar, Sanju and Pati Ram came, about whom he has stated that they had seen the accused-applicant going with the deceased at relevant date. Submission of the learned counsel is that Guddo Devi has been discharged by the prosecution and Ashok Kumar & Sanju were examined and they have been declared hostile by the prosecution, therefore, in view of the statement of witnesses, the accused-applicant is entitled to be released on bail. In respect criminal history the learned counsel has submitted that in those cases the accused-applicant has been released on bail and the bail orders have been annexed to the
bail application. Applicant is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, therefore, there is no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence. Applicant is languishing in jail since 1.2.2020 and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail but he has not disputed the aforesaid facts.
In view of the above, I find that the case is totally based on circumstantial evidence of last seen and the relevant witnesses of last seen have been either discharged or have been declared hostile by the prosecution. Circumstantial evidence, if any, is yet to be established during trial, therefore, without commenting on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Let applicant- Moharpal , involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 22.6.2021 Vandana
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the accused is entitled to bail when the case is based solely on circumstantial evidence of being last seen with the deceased and key witnesses have been discharged or declared hostile.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Moharpal
State of U.P.
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
