Dismissed

Tej Pratap Singh @ Prince v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Jul 2022BAIL/11154/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court rejected the bail application of an accused implicated in a pre-planned murder conspiracy. The court noted the accused's role in transporting shooters and the grave apprehension that releasing him would destroy evidence and endanger witnesses.

What did the court decide?

The bail application is rejected. The accused-applicant is not be enlarged on bail.

Tej Pratap Singh @ Prince Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11154 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Tej Pratap Singh @ Prince Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amrendra Kumar,Dr. Pooja Singh,Durgesh Kumar Asthana,Neeraj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akshay Kumar Singh,Anil Pratap Singh,Arun Singh,Vinay Kumar Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

1. Present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR No.15 of 2021 registered under Sections 302, 307, 201, 212, 120B read with 34 IPC Police Station Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow East, Commissionarate Lucknow.

¶6

2. The FIR in question came to be registered on the complaint of Mohar Singh, who also got injured in the incident. Allegations in the FIR are that on 06.01.2021 at around 8 P.M. the complainant and his friend, Ajit Singh (the deceased) son of Radheshyam Singh were going towards their car after making a purchase of some items. At that moment, Kanhaiya Vishwakarma @ Girdhari @ Doctor s/o Daggar r/o Village Lakhanpur and three other unknown assailants started indiscriminate firing aiming at them. Ajit Singh died instantly because of several fire arm injuries received by him, and the complainant also received gunshot injuries on his leg.

¶7

Allegation is that the attack on Ajit Singh and the complainant was a result of pre-planned criminal conspiracy by dreaded criminals and gangsters, Kuntu Singh @ Dhruv Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh, and they were behind this attack and murder. It was alleged that accused-Kuntu Singh @ Dhruv Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh were giving threats to deceased, Ajit Singh and the complainant for last two years. Deceased, Ajit Singh was warned that he should not give evidence in the murder of exMLA, Sarvesh Singh for which FIR No.384 of 2013 was registered at Police Station Jiyanpur. The case was at the stage of evidence and evidence of Ajit Singh was scheduled in the next week from the date of incident.

¶8

3. The accused-applicant was not named in the FIR, however, during the course of investigation, accused applicant's name got surfaced as one of the main accused in the commission of the offence. Accused-Kuntu Singh @

¶9

Dhruv Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh are known gangsters and history sheeters having criminal history of more than 50 cases. They had enmity and rivalry with ex-MLA, Sarvesh Singh @ Sippu, who was murdered in criminal conspiracy of these two gangsters by contract killers. For the murder of ex-MLA, Sarvesh Singh, FIR No.384 of 2013 at Police Station Jiyanpur District Azamgarh was registered and deceased, Ajit Singh was an eyewitness of the said case. It is alleged that Ex-MLA, Sarvesh Singh was murdered in the same manner as Ajeet Singh got murdered by the shooters. 4. Deceased, Ajit Singh apprehending threat to his life, approached this Court by filing a petition being Writ-C No.47210 of 2014. Said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 4th September, 2014 with direction to the local police that the request of deceased, Ajeet Singh for protection should be examined as per the Government Order dated 9th May, 2014.

¶10

5. During the course of investigation, it has been discovered that the accused-applicant was fully involved in the criminal conspiracy to give effect to the incident. The shooters, who killed deceased, Ajit Singh were taken away from the place of incident in a Duster car driven by the accusedapplicant and he hid the said Duster car after shootout. He brought the shooters from Azamgarh to Lucknow and provided them safe passage both pre and post incident. CCTV footage of the area, which form the part of the investigation, would reveal involvement of the accused-applicant and Duster car in transporting the shooters. The shooters were in constant touch with the accused-applicant prior to and after the incident. Duster car bearing Registration No.MH48P 8658 (Red colour) was recovered on the pointing out by the accused-applicant. As stated above, this car was used by the accused-applicant for bringing the shooters, co-accused from Azamgarh and after the incident for providing safe passes to them.

¶11

6. Investigation would also reveal that blood stains of the injured coaccused/shooter, who received injury as Mohar Singh fired in self-defence, were found in the said car.

¶12

7. It is revealed in the investigation that the accused-applicant had played an active role in the criminal conspiracy of shooting deceased-Ajit Singh and injured witness/ complainant Mohar Singh. The accused-applicant after the incident contacted Abdur Rehan, co-accused to provide safe passage to the

¶13

shooters from Lucknow to outside of Uttar Pradesh. Investigation would also reveal that the accused-applicant was driving the car and he was talking on WhatsApp with co-accused Shivendra Singh @ Ankur Singh informing him about killing the deceased, Ajit Singh. Main conspirators, Kuntu Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh in their statements had revealed a very well planned conspiracy to kill Ajit Singh, and the role played by everyone including the present accused-applicant in commission of the offence. Call detail records of the accused would also revealed that the accused-applicant was involved fully in hatching criminal conspiracy and playing his role as per plan in execution of the said criminal conspiracy to commit gruesome murder of Ajit Singh in most gory manner.

¶14

8. Ms. Pooja Singh, learned counsel for appearing for the accusedapplicant submits that the accused-applicant is innocent, and he has been falsely implicated in the offence. The accused-applicant was not present even near the incident. On the basis of call detail report, the accusedapplicant has been implicated in commission of the offence. There is no cogent and credible evidence available against him regarding his involvement in hatching criminal conspiracy to kill the deceased, Ajit Singh. She has further submitted that one of the accused, Abdur Rehan having a similar role has been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 14.03.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8581 of 2021.

¶15

9. On the other hand, Mr Anil Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, and Mr Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate have opposed the bail application, and submitted that deceased, Ajit Singh, who was a witness in the murder of ex-MLA, Sarvesh Singh was killed in the capital city of Uttar Pradesh i.e. Lucknow in a most daredevil and gruesome manner. More than 50 gunshots were fired by the accused shooters in a busy market area to ensure that there would be no chance of survival of the deceased, Ajit Singh. Deceased, Ajit Singh was receiving threats and was being warned by the gangsters, Kuntu Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh not to give evidence in the case of murder of exMLA, Sarvesh Singh against them.

¶16

It has been submitted that deceased, Ajit Singh apprehended threat to his life, and, therefore, he approached this Court by filing a writ petition being

¶17

Writ C No. 47210 of 2014. Evidence of deceased- Ajeet Singh was fixed in the coming week. Ajit Singh was not being deterred by the threats and was determined to depose against the accused, Kuntu Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh, a well planned criminal conspiracy was hatched to eliminate him. The accused-applicant was part of the criminal conspiracy. He transported the shooters from Azamgarh in a Duster car driven by him, and his mobile location was found near the incident, at the time of shootout, in which more than 50-60 gunshots were fired by the shooters. He ensured safe passage to the shooters by using the Duster car, which was later on recovered on his pointing out.

¶18

It has been submitted that the investigating officer has collected evidence against the accused-applicant, which would show that he was fully involved in criminal conspiracy and played an active role in commission of the offence. They have submitted that the manner in which the incident took place in busy market area in a most daredevil manner, wherein more than 50 shots were fired at the deceased and looking at the role played by the applicant, this court may not enlarge him on bail as there is a grave threat to the life of complainant, Mohar Singh. Accused, Kuntu Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh have more than 50 serious criminal cases to their credit. They have further submitted that looking at the criminal record of the main conspirators and the fact that the present accused-applicant is a member of said gang, he should not be enlarged on bail.

¶19

10. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the accusedapplicant as well as the complainant and the State.

¶20

11. The incident took place in a busy area in the capital city Lucknow at 8 PM in a most dare devil manner. Allegedly, contract killers were hired to kill Ajeet Singh by the conspirators. The investigation and evidence brought on record, which form part of the case diary, would reveal involvement of the accused-applicant in commission of the offence as noted above. The accused-applicant belonged to the gang of dreaded criminals and gangsters. These accused have not allowed the trial to progress inasmuch as till date the case has not yet been committed before the Sessions Court for trial as they have been taking adjournment on one pretext or the other. Prosecution apprehends that the injured eyewitness and the complainant, Mohar Singh would also be eliminated if the accused-applicant and/or other accused are

¶21

granted bail and they may go scot-free. The accused-applicant and coaccused in a most gory manner have committed murder of the deceased who was a witness in the murder case of ex-MLA Sarvesh Singh, against accused-Kuntu Singh and Akhand Pratap Singh. 12. Considering the nature of offence, evidence available on record and apprehension of prosecution of eliminating/destroying the evidence against the accused and the impact on the society of the crime, this Court without further commenting on the merit of the case does not find any ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. The present bail application is hereby rejected .

¶22

( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )

¶23

Order Date :- 29.7.2022 prateek

¶24

Digitally signed by PRATEEK ARORA Date: 2022.08.02 14:16:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Tej Pratap Singh @ Prince v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tej Pratap Singh @ Prince v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amar Pal Singh Alias Amber Singh S/O Shri Gangaram Singh (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

State of U.P. Vs C/P.2743 Dharam Singh and Another.

Neelam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Smt. Sushila Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harbhajan Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Smt. Rinky Vs State of U.P. and Another