This judgment grants bail in a murder case to the applicant. The court held that since there was no direct evidence against the applicant and the case relied on circumstantial evidence, the applicant made out a fit case for bail.
Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specific conditions in the interest of justice.
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:105624
Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43228 of 2022
Applicant :- Salman Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Grijesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prem Chandra Dwivedi
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 340 of 2021, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Achhnera, District-Agra, during the pendency of trial.
As per the prosecution case in brief, informant-Pawan who is son of Om Veer Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') lodged a First Information Report on 22.10.2021 against Pramod and Paro alleging inter-alia that on 22.10.2021 at about 08:00 am, he was informed by his family members that his father has been done to death in the night and his dead body is lying in the field of Ramesh. On the said information, when he came to his village, he was told by his mother Pushpa Devi that earlier, Paro and Pramod had threatened his father, therefore, they believe that his father has been murdered by Paro and Pramod.
During investigation,the complicity of the applicant-Salman Khan and co-accused Aamin @ Yamin came into light in the confessional statement of Paro wherein she has stated inter-alia that she was having illicit relation with Aamin @ Yamin. One day, deceased saw both of them together, thereafter, he started mounting pressure upon her to make physical relation with him also, to which she refused and told about this to Yamin, on which he became furious and hatched a conspiracy along with Salman to commit the murder of Om Veer Singh. As per their plan, Om Veer Singh was brought by Paro in the field, where Salman and Yamin were already ambushed. Salman gagged the mouth of the deceased and Yamin slits his neck by Banka.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged by the son of the deceased
against Pramod and Paro on the basis of suspicion because earlier they had threatened the deceased to kill him. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Paro and because of enmity between the family of co-accused Paro and Aamin @ Yamin. It is next submitted that false story has been set up by the police that co-accused Aamin @ Yamin had illicit relation with Paro. In this regard, it is pointed out that on 09.08.2020, Pramod Kumar, husband of Paro had lodged an F.I.R. against Sabuddin (father of coaccused Aamin @ Yamin) at Case Crime No. 323 of 2020, under Sections 354Kha, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 9/10 POCSO Act in which minor daughter of Paro was victim. In the said case, after culmination of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted on 12.10.2020 against Sabuddin and charge has been framed on 12.03.2021. In this case false recovery of 'Banka' has been shown at the pointing out of the applicant. Lastly it is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 23.10.2021, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but they do not dispute the factum of the case as argued on behalf of the applicant.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that vide order of this Court dated 24.03.2023, learned A.G.A. for the state was granted time to seek instructions with regard to material collected by the investigating officer relating to alleged illicit relation between the Yamin and co-accused Paro, like C.D.R. etc. In response learned A.G.A., filed a personal affidavit dated 01.05.2023 sworn by S.I. Sobran Singh, who is the investigating officer of this case mentioning therein in paragraph no. 8 of the affidavit that except the oral statement of some persons, there is no corroborative material regarding illicit relation between Yamin and Paro. I also find that it is the case of circumstantial evidence. It is well settled that in cases of circumstantial evidence, entire chain of circumstances on which conclusion of guilt is to be drawn, should be fully established and should not leave any reasonable ground of doubt. There is no direct evidence of the incident against the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties as discussed above, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is
hereby allowed .
Let the applicant- Salman Khan , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.
(ii) That 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.
(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.
In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 16.5.2023 Saurabh
Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant made out a fit case for bail in a murder trial on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
Whether the reliance on the confessional statement of a co-accused warrants the rejection of bail for the applicant.
What conditions are appropriate for releasing the applicant on bail in a murder case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Salman Khan
Sanjay Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
