Dabbu Saroj And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 14866 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 14
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11215 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Dabbu Saroj And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

Heard Shri Ankit Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This bail application has been moved by the applicants- Dabbu Saroj and Govinda Saroj for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.185 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 120B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Hathigawan, District Pratapgrah, during trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the co-accused Sapna Saroj had lodged F.I.R. on 19.09.2021 at Police Station Hathigawan, District Pratapgrah against unknown persons alleging therein that on 15.09.2021 at about 08:00 when her husband (deceased) was taking dinner, a phone call was received on his mobile phone and he without taking his dinner had left the house and thereafter a person in the name of Arjun Pal of the village informed her that one Bolero vehicle had come from the side of Village Bhitara and deceased had boarded that vehicle and thereafter he did not return. It is also submitted in the F.I.R. that on 18.09.2021, photographs of a dead body was being circulated on the Whatsapp groups and she had gone to the scene and identified her husband in the mortuary. During the course of investigation, complicity of the applicants as well as other co-accused persons had surfaced for hatching a conspiracy to eliminate the deceased and the conspiracy is shown to be overheard by a witness namely Lallu Yadav and thereafter the applicants and other co-accused persons were shown to have been arrested and confessed their guilt while they were in the custody of the police to the tune that the coaccused Sapna Saroj in order to eliminate the deceased had hatched conspiracy with other co-accused persons and as also the earrings (Jhumka) of co-accused Sapna Saroj was also recovered from the possession of the co-accused Dablu.

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence as no body has seen the applicants or any other person committing the offence and the circumstances, which are being alleged against the applicants, are so weak that the prosecution would not be able to secure conviction of the applicant in the court of law. In this regard the learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs. State of Maharshtra : 1984 Cri. L.J. 178.

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the applicant no.2 Govind Saroj is the brother-in-law of the deceased and applicant no.1 is the friend of applicant no.2 have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that there was no occasion for the applicants to have hatched any conspiracy to murder the deceased, which has been cooked up by the prosecution with the aid of the persons, who are inimical towards the applicants, is highly improbable and self contradictory as one independent witness in the name of Arjun Pal is stated to have seen the deceased leaving village in Bolero vehicle, therefore, the prosecution is taking contradictory stand.

Learned counsel for the applicants further pointed out that the similarly circumstanced and identically placed other co-accused namely Sapna Saroj, wife of the deceased, Shiva alias Shiv Kumar and Govind have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 14.07.2022 and 17.8.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 133 of 2022 and 3302 of 2022 and the case of the applicants is not on worse footing than that of the aforesaid co-accused who have already been granted bail by this Court, therefore, the bail application of the applicants may also be considered and they should also be released on bail on principles of parity.

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicants that they ares ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon them. It has also been pointed out that the accused applicant are not having any criminal history and the applicants are in jail since 24.09.2021 and has by now done a substantial period of incarceration, therefore, the bail application of the applicants may also be considered by this Court sympathetically and they should also be released on bail.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that in particular, the fact that the case rests on circumstantial evidence, the fact that the evidence against the applicant is one of extra judicial confession alone with no independent evidence to prima facie indicate his complicity; similarly circumstanced and identically placed other co-accused, namely Sapna Saroj, wife of the deceased, Shiva alias Shiv Kumar and Mohit Saroj have already been granted bail by this Court and further considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs. State of Maharshtra : 1984 Cri. L.J. 178 and Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

Let the applicants- Dabbu Saroj and Govinda Saroj involved in Case Crime No.185 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 120B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Hathigawan, District Pratapgrah be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

(1) The applicants will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

(2) The applicants will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and their personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

(3) The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

(4) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

(5) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial, in order to secure their presence, proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(6) The applicant shall remain present, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

(8) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

Order Date :- 21.10.2022

GSY