Dismissed

Dharamveer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Mar 2023BAIL/44085/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge High Court order dismissed a criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court rejected the plea, holding that the gravity of the murder charge, severity of punishment, and presence of four consistent eyewitnesses negated the grounds for bail, noting that FIR delay was explained by the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected. Observation confined to bail issue and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

Dharamveer Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44085 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dharamveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar,Mohit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Ms. Pratima Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant.

¶6

By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 311 of 2022, under Sections 302, 201, 34 of I.P.C., Police Station Souron, District Kasganj, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per prosecution case, in brief, informant who is younger brother of the deceased Bhojraj Yadav lodged F.I.R. on 02.08.2022 at 23:53 o'clock, against applicant- Dharamveer and Rajeev as well as two unknown persons, with the allegations inter-alia that his elder brother Bhojraj Yadav (now deceased) was living in village Dhela Sarai for last five months. The accused Dharamveer and his nephew Rajeev used to drive JCB and tractor at sand's stock point. Jitendra Yadav-elder brother of Dharamveer also used to come to Bhojraj Yadav, but Jitendra Yadav died on the way to hospital due to illness and vomiting of blood, therefore, Dharamveer and Rajeev had suspicion that Jitendra was poisoned to death by Bhojraj Yadav. On account of this enmity, on 30.07.2022 at 5:30 pm, Dharamveer and Rajeev took his brother on their motorcycle on the pretext of bringing liquor and feeding him in front of him and his cousin Surjeet Yadav, but he did not return till morning. Later on, Surendra Singh and Ranjeet Yadav told that they had seen Dharamveer, Rajeev and two unknown persons throwing Bhojraj into Ganga river after killing him. Since then, from the morning of 31.07.2022, people started searching on the bank of the river Ganges a

¶8

hectic search was made to trace out the dead body of the deceased, but all went in vain. On 02.08.2022, at 7:00 o'clock, when divers searched his brother's body in the Ganga river, the same was found near village Kharagwari.

¶9

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the incident took place on 30.07.2022, at 17:30 o'clock, but F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of three days on 02.08.2022 at 23:53 o'clock, which is fatal to the prosecution case. He next argued that so far as alleged motive is concerned, earlier, no F.I.R. has been lodged with regard to death of Jitendra because he died his natural death. It is also argued that the informant, despite having knowledge, did not promptly inform the police about missing of his brother and after recovery of dead body of the deceased, lodged the F.I.R. on the false and concocted allegations, whereas applicant has nothing to do with the matter who has been languishing in jail since 04.08.2022.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that there are four eyewitnesses in this case. The deceased was taken away by the accused Dharamveer and Rajeev in presence of the informant and Surjeet Yadav on 30.07.2022 at 5:30 pm but he did not return. Thereafter, there is evidence of last seen also in this case. According to Surendra Singh and Ranjeet Yadav they saw the accused persons while throwing the dead body of the deceased- Bhojraj in Ganga River. It is also submitted that when the informant came to know about the incident from Surendra Singh and Ranjeet Yadav, then people started searching the dead body of the deceased in Ganga River, which was recovered on 02.08.2022 at 7:00 am, thereafter, F.I.R. was lodged on the same day therefore, prosecution case cannot be said to be vitiated on the ground of delay.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that there are four eye witnesses with regard to the incident

¶12

which took place in two parts. Firstly the deceased was taken away from his house by the accused Dharamveer and Rajeev in presence of informant and Surjeet Yadav. Secondly witnesses Surendra Singh and Ranjeet Yadav had seen the accused persons while throwing the dead body of the deceased- Bhojraj in Ganga River. All the eyewitnesses supported the prosecution case and there is no inconsistency in the statement of above mentioned four eye-witnesses, therefore, as on date, there is no material on record to disbelieve their statements. So far as motive is concerned, the same is a matter of trial. I also find that the delay has been properly explained by the prosecution in the F.I.R. and merely on the ground of delay, the gravity of offence cannot be wiped out.

¶13

In view of the above, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, evidence on record as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant and severity of punishment, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected at this stage.

¶15

It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

¶16

Order Date :- 28.3.2023 Kashifa

¶17

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharamveer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharamveer 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

Vimal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Yatendra Vs State of U.P.

Rajeev Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neeraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others