Jeetu @ Jitendra Bansal vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 25300 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:182658
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40783 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Jeetu @ Jitendra Bansal
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Tripathi,Mandvi Tripathi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajatshatru Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

1. Heard Mr. V.P. Srivastava, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Santosh Tripathi, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Ajatshatru Pandey, the learned counsel representing first informant.

2. Perused the record.

3. This application for bail has been filed by the applicant Jeetu @ Jitendra Bansal seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 321 of 2023, under Section 306 I.P.C. and Sections 22 & 23 of U.P. Regulation of Money Lending Act, Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the trial.

4. Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 30.6.2023, a prompt F.I.R. dated 30.6.2023 was lodged by first informant Subham Agrawal (son of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 321 of 2023, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad. In the aforesaid F.I.R. applicantJeetu @ Jitendra Bansal has been nominated as solitary named accused.

5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that the deceased before committing suicide made a suicide note on 30.6.2023 wherein it is alleged that the named accused (applicant herein) had given a sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- to the father of the first informant and in spite of the fact that the deceased has paid Rs. 2,00,00,000/- towards repayment of said amount a balance of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- was further alleged against the deceased.

6. After aforementioned F.I.R. was lodged, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned Case Crime Number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. The inquest (panchnama) of the body of the deceased was conducted on 30.6.2023. In the opinion of the witnesses of inquest (panch-witnesses) the nature of death of the deceased was categorized as suicidal. Thereafter the post mortem of the body of the deceased was conducted. The doctor who conducted the autopsy of the body of the deceased found following ante-mortem injuries on his body:-

(i). ligature mark on neck oblique placed 6 cm. for Rt. 7 cm for left ear, 8 cm from chin. Total chamber of nect 49 cm length of ligature mark 41 cm gap of 8 cm tut part aspect root of neck glistening tut underneath ligature mark.

7. In the opinion of the autopsy surgeon the cause of death of the deceased was Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging.

8. During course of investigation Investigating Officer recovered the diary of the deceased, wherein the recital occurring in the F.I.R. is also mentioned. Investigating Officer further examined first informant and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. On the basis of above and other material collected by the Investigating Officer, he came to the conclusion that complicity of named accused is established in the crime in question. Accordingly, he submitted the charge sheet dated 26.7.2023, whereby the applicant has been charge sheeted under Section 306 I.P.C.

9. Learned Senior Counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused yet he is liable to be enlarged on bail. The deceased had initially executed a registered sale deed dated 3.3.2022 in favour of the applicant for an area of 110 Sq. yards valued as to be 11,10,000/-. Subsequently in respect of the same plot another sale deed was executed by the vendor i.e. the deceased on 2.6.2023 in favour of one Dheer Singh. It is on account of the above that the dispute arose between the parties with regard to the right title and interest over the land in dispute. The fact that the subsequent sale deed was executed in respect of the same plot is clearly explicit from a parallel being brought from the Chauhaddi of the property sold as occurring in both the sale deed which is identical and similar. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the recital contained in the personal diary of the deceased on the basis of which it is alleged that applicant is guilty of committing an offence under Section 306 I.P.C. is unworthy of reliance. He submits that there is no documentary evidence to show that a sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- was given by the applicant to the deceased nor there is any document showing repayment of Rs. 20,00,000/- by the deceased to the present applicant. He, therefore, submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question.

10. In the submission of the learned Senior Counsel an offence under Section 306 I.P.C. is subject to trial evidence. Furthermore, an offence under Section 306 has to be examined on the conjoint reading of 307 and 106 I.P.C. Up to this stage no such material has emerged on the basis of which it can be definitely concluded that the applicant has abetted, instigated or conspired in the commission of the crime in question. There is nothing on record to show that the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of the applicant either. To buttress his submission he has relied to the following judgments of the Supreme Court:-

(i) Sarvesh Vs. State of U.P. 2018 ADJ Online 0163.

(ii) Kanchan Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2021.

(iii) Mirza Iqbal Alias Golu and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1251.

(iv) Mariano Anto Bruno and Another Vs. Inspector of Police 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1387.

11. Applicant has criminal history to his credit. However he has already been enlarged on bail in all of the cases pending against him. The applicant is in jail since 24.7.2023. As such has has undergone more than 2-1/2 months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. Therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystallized. However up to this stage, no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during pendency of trial. On the cumulative strength of above, the learned Senior Counsel thus submits that the 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 cooperate with the trial.

12. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that since applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused, therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. The complicity of the applicant in the crime in question is clearly established as per the recital contained in the personal diary of the deceased which is now part of the case diary. They, therefore, contend that no sympathy be shown in favour of applicant by this Court. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.

13. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, the learned counsel representing first informant, upon perusal of record, evidence, accusations made, complicity of accused, nature and gravity of offence and coupled with the fact that there is no documentary evidence to show that a sum of Rs. 40,00,000/- was given by the applicant to the deceased nor there is any document showing repayment of Rs. 20,00,000/- by the deceased to the present applicant, an offence under Section 306 I.P.C. is subject to trial evidence, same is to be examined on the conjoint reading of Section 307 and Section 106 I.P.C., up to this stage no such material has emerged on the basis of which it can be definitely concluded that the applicant has abetted, instigated or conspired in the commission of the crime in question, or the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of the applicant, the judgment of the this Court/Supreme Court referred to above, the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant, therefore entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystallized, yet neither the learned A.G.A. nor the learned counsel for first informant could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during pendency of trial, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhash Chandra Gangwal and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2023 Live Law SC 373(5), prima facie the dispute has arisen between the parties on account of sale deed having been executed by the deceased in respect of the same land twice, even when the first sale deed was executed in favour of the applicant, but without making any comments on the merits of the case the applicant has made out a case for bail.

14. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

15. Let the applicantJeetu @ Jitendra Bansal involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

ix. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

x. 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.

16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

Order Date :- 19.9.2023

Aiman