Amir Chand Patel v State of Uttar Pradesh
Allahabad High Court
4 September 2013
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24610 of 2013
The Order of the Court was as follows :
1. Heard Sri Viresh Misra, senior advocate assisted by Sri Sameer Jain and Sri Amit Misra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not named in the FIR. The prosecution case was that on 23.4.2012, the deceased Mahesh Prasad had gone from his house in Ardali Bazar, Varanasi to Bhojuveer Satti to purchase vegetables at 8:00 a.m. by his scooty. While returning home, near Raymonds showroom, Ardali Bazar, two unknown persons shot him in the back. The local persons took him to hospital where he died. FIR was lodged on the same day at 11:40 a.m. by Ramesh Prasad Jaiswal, the brother of the deceased.
3. Learned counsel submits that during investigation, the name of one Vijay Jaiswal came to light, who was detained in jail, with whom the deceased had litigation regarding property and he was considered by the police to be the main conspirator, who through Rama Nand Tiwari alias Manav, Fahim Ansari alias Rinku, Anand Pandey alias Guru, Rashid and Parvez committed murder of the deceased. On 29.4.2012, further statement of the first informant was recorded by police wherein he raised suspicion against Vijay Kumar Jaiswal. It was contended that witnesses Sant Prasad alias Guddu and Ramesh Kumar Soni also gave evidence of criminal conspiracy against Vijay Kumar Jaiswal. Thereafter, co-accused Rohit alias Sunny Singh was arrested by police and he also disclosed about the criminal conspiracy hatched by Vijay Kumar Jaiswal.
The eyewitnesses claimed that the deceased was shot by Fahim Ansari aliad Rinku and Roshan Gupta alias Raju Gupta. It was contended that up to Parcha no.35 of the case diary dated 18.6.2012, the applicant was nowhere in picture. Subsequently, in the second confessional statement of co-accused Fahim Ansari alias Rinku, the name of the applicant came to surface. It was also contended that Fahim Ansari alias Rinku has revoked his confessional statement given to police through an affidavit before the trial court.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
4. For a considerable time, the police recorded the statements of witnesses, which disclosed the name of Vijay Kumar Jaiswal as the main conspirator. Subsequently, his name was given up by the police and in the confessional statement of Fahim Ansari alias Rinku, the name of the applicant was introduced with a role of criminal conspiracy. The main shooter Fahim Ansari alias Rinku has been granted bail vide order dated 29.4.2013 passed by Hon’ble B.K. Narayana, J. in criminal misc. bail application no.1239 of 2013. As far as criminal history of the applicant is concerned, the same has been explained in paragraph no.15 of the affidavit. Out of 24 cases, he has been acquitted in 9 cases.
In one case, final report was submitted, in 2 cases, proceedings are stayed, in 11 cases, the applicant is on bail, but none of these cases relate to any heinous offence and these cases are simply for causing hurt or forgery or underย Negotiable Instruments Act.
5. Except the confessional statement of co-accused Fahim Ansari alias Rinku, there does not appear to be any material against the applicant.
6. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
7. Let applicant Amir Chand Patel involved in case crime no. 260 of 2012 under Sections 302, 120-B/34ย I.P.C.ย pertaining to Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned subject to the following conditions :
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him ; and
(b) 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.
Order accordingly
