Sangam Lal Bind Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 75

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50176 of 2022

Applicant :- Sangam Lal Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jyoti Swaroop Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arun Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Learned A.G.A. for the State has filed an afÏdavit dated 21.04.2023 enclosing F.S.L. report, which is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant-Sangam Lal Bind, who is involved in S.T. No. 426 of 2018 (State vs. Sangam Lal Bind and another) in connection with Case Crime No. 726 of 2018, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., Police Station Naini, District Allahabad, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution case in brief, on the information of Jitendra Tewari, owner of the house in question, F.I.R. was lodged on 29.06.2018 for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. against unknown persons wherein it is mentioned that dead body of his tenant Shiv Prasad was found in the rented portion of his house. On the said information, inquest proceedings was conducted and thereafter post-mortem of the deceased was conducted on 29.06.2018 in which cause of death was found hemorrhage due to severe blooding from the incised wound on his neck. After the incident, when the father of the deceased came to know about the murder of his son, he gave an application to the police disclosing therein that his daughter-in-law was having illicit relationship with the present applicant-Sangam Lal Bind, therefore, he believes that his son has been murdered by the applicant and his daughter-in-law Reeta in collusion

¶9

with each other. On the basis of said application, applicant was apprehended by the police and thereafter at his pointing out, blood stained banka (weapon of assault) has been recovered which was sent for forensic examination and according to forensic report dated 14.03.2019, human blood was found on the recovered banka .

¶10

The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The recovery of banka has been falsely shown by the police at the pointing out of the applicant, whereas, no such banka has been recovered as alleged by the prosecution. Much emphasis has been given by contending that applicant has been made accused before the recovery of alleged weapon of assault on the basis of application of father of the deceased and confessional statement of the applicant. Referring the statement of Sonu Pandey, it is pointed out that Sonu Pandey has stated that on the day of incident, applicant had also visited the house of the deceased for dinner whereas this is wholly improbable that a man, who is aware about the person that he had an illicit relation with his wife, will not invite him for dinner. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 02.07.2018.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that applicant is not a stranger person but cousin of the deceased, therefore, he used to visit the house of the deceased. Since the applicant was having illicit relation with the wife of the deceased therefore they, in collusion with each other, committed the murder of the deceased in order to achieve their goal.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that though there is no eye-witness account but complicity of the applicant came into light in the application of father of the deceased and apart from confessional statement of the applicant, there is corroborative material of recovery of banka (weapon

¶13

of assault) at the pointing out of the applicant on 02.07.2018 which corroborates from the injuries found on the deceased. The said banka was sent for forensic examination on which, human blood was found. I also find that the bail application of the coaccused Reeta Devi has been rejected vide order dated 21.03.2023 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 56811 of 2022. The offence is heinous in nature. It appears that it is a brutal murder which took place in a preplanned manner.

¶14

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant, nature of injury, severity of punishment and forensic report dated 14.03.2019, I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected .

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 1.5.2023 Saurabh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sangam Lal Bind v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangam Lal Bind v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kafeel @ Kafeeluddin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Indresh Pal Vs State of U.P.

Patil Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Devendra Singh Alias Bittu Vs State of U.P.

Sahil @ Bhura Vs State of U.P. and Another