Single judge high court allowed bail to applicant Mohit Bhati in a murder case. Applicant was not named in FIR but included in charge-sheet. Court found his role in restraining victims distinct from those who assaulted the deceased.
Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding attendance and preventing tampering.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:133171
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15539 of 2023
Applicant :- Mohit Bhati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Rana,Atharva Dixit,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Dixit
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Kumar, son of first informant has scuffle with some persons. On account of which Barun Kumar sustained injury on his head. The F.I.R. further records that the car of Barun was also damaged by pelting breaks. On the aforesaid information, Aniruddh (nephew of first informant), Tarun (son of first informant), and Nitin reached the place of occurrence where Varun Kumar (son of first informant) was found lying on the ground in injured condition and his body was soacked with blood. Deepak and Sanjay Rawat were not found on the spot. Thereafter, applicant was taken to the hospital where the Doctor declared him brought dead.
Varun Kumar. According to another eye witness namely Sanjay Rawat, three accused i.e. Mohit, Kallu and Sachin were involved in the crime. His description of the occurrence is similar to the other eye witness. The post-mortem of the body of deceased was conducted. In the opinion of Autopsy Surgeon, the cause of death of deceased was shock as a result of antemortem craniocerebral damage consequent upon blunt force impact to the Head. All the injures are ante-mortem in nature and produced by blunt force. Injuries no.1 to 4 are sufficient to cause death both individually and collectively in the ordinary course of nature. The Autopsy Surgeon found following ante mortem injuries on the body of deceased:
"1. lacerated wound measuring 1.0 cm x 0.5cm X bone deep obliquely present over the right side of forehead. 5.0 cm lateral to midline and touching the right eye brow. The margins of the wound were irregular contused and tissue bridging was present.
ii. Lacerated wound of size 4.2 cm x 0.5 cm X bone deep obliquely present over the left side of forehead, 3.5 cm lateral to the midline and touching the left eyebrow. The margins of the wound were irregular, contused and tissue bridging was present. The wound was surrounded by reddish bruise of size 6.0 cm x 2.5 cm.
iii. Lacerated wound of size 6.0 cm x 0.5cm X cavity deep obliquely present over the right side back of head. 1.5 cm lateral to the posterior midline and 3.5 cm above the occipital protuberance. The margins of the wound were irregular, contused and tissue bridging was present. On further exploration of thw wound, depressed comminuted fracture of the underlying occipital bone was present. One small piece of red coloured brick measuring 2.06cm x 1.7 cm present in situ,
labelled "X" over it, preserved and handed over to the police.
iv. Lacerated wound of size 6.2 cm X 0.5 cm X bone deep obliquely present over the left side back of head were irregular, contused and tissue bridging was present.
v. Abrasion, reddish in colour measuring 3.5cm X 1.5 cm present over the right side of the face, 5.0 lateral to the midline and 2.0 cm below the right eyebrow.
vi. Abrasion reddish in colour measuring 4.0 cm x 3.0 cm present over the bridge of nose in the midline, 1.3 cm below the root of nose.
vii. Abrasion, reddish in colour measuring 3 cm X 2 cm present over the left side of the face, 6.0 lateral to the midline and 3.0 cm below the left eyebrow.
viii. Abrasion reddish in colour measuring 2.8 cm x 0.4 cm present over the left side of the face, 8.0cm lateral to the midline and 5.5cm below the left eyebrow.
viii. Lacerated wound of size 22 cm x 0.5 cm X muscle deep obliquely present over the inner aspect of the right side of lower lip, touching the midline. The margins of the wound were irregular, contused and tissue bridging was present. "
applicant is not named in the F.I.R.. He is innocent. Referring to the material on record, details of which have been referred to above, he submits that the only evidence that has emerged against applicant is that applicant was present at the place of occurrence and the role of assaulting the injured/deceased is assigned to Lallu Pandit and Sachin. There is nothing on record to show that applicant has assaulted the deceased. He therefore submits that case of present applicant is clearly distinguishable from other two charge-sheeted accused namely Sachin and Kallu Pandit. Applicant is in custody since 30.10.2022. As such he has undergone 8 months of incarceration. The police report (charge-sheet) in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such the entire evidence sought to relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallised. He further submits that since the case of present applicant is distinguishable than other two charged sheeted accused, therefore, applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
learned A.G.A. for State, upon consideration of material on record, evidence, gravity and nature of offence, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that applicant is not named in the F.I.R., the complicity of applicant in the crime in question has emerged during the course of investigation, as per CCTV footage, information given by the police informer after looking at the CCTV footage and the statement of two eye witnesses Deepak and Sanjay Rawat, the role of applicant Mohit Bhati is preventing the two companions of the deceased namely Deepak and Sanjay Rawat from reaching the injured who was being beaten brutally by other two accused, as such case of applicant being distinguishable from the other two charged accused namely Sachin and Kallu Pandit, the police report (charge-sheet) in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, as such the entire evidence sought to relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallised, up to this stage, no such circumstance could be pointed by the learned A.G.A. necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the course of trial but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
(i) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) Applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court
on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
Order Date :- 6.7.2023 YK
Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an applicant not named in the FIR but brought on charge-sheet can be granted bail after the charge-sheet is submitted.
Whether the complicity in a joint crime can be separated when the roles of co-accused are distinct.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohit Bhati
State of U.P.
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
