Prolonged incarceration without trial can violate the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, necessitating the grant of bail under appropriate conditions.

JUDGMENT :

AMIT MAHAJAN, J.

1. The present application is filed seeking regular bail in FIR No. 08/2019 dated 07.01.2019, registered at Police Station Ranhola for offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

2. Briefly stated, on 06.01.2019, the police received information regarding an incident where two persons, later identified as Deepak and Neeraj, were found injured and bleeding on Baprola Main Road, near a local school. They were immediately transported to a hospital, where they were declared brought dead. It is alleged that both had sustained gunshot injuries. Consequently, the present FIR was registered.

3. During the investigation, the scene of the alleged crime was examined, whereby, bloodstains, two damaged bullet shells, and stones scattered near the location of the bodies were found. The post-mortem reports indicated that both deceased persons had suffered multiple gunshot wounds. Neeraj had wounds to his collarbone and chest, while Deepak sustained a bullet wound to his left shoulder. The post-mortem reports confirmed that these gunshot wounds were the cause of death.

4. During the investigation, it was revealed that Deepak Tiwari (applicant/accused), his brother and a co-accused, had animosity with the victims. The statement of eyewitness - Sachin Thapa was recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC, wherein he stated that he was with the deceased at the time when the accused, Deepak Tiwari and Suraj Tiwari, opened fire on them. He further stated that he narrowly escaped and saved his life.

5. It was further revealed that accused Deepak Tiwari and his co- accused were arrested in connection with another FIR bearing No. 06/2019 dated 09.01.2019 for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act, and had disclosed their involvement in the present case during police interrogation. The applicant was formally arrested on 28.01.2019.

6. It is alleged that the accused, Deepak Tiwari, in his disclosure statement, stated that the deceased, Neeraj, had been involved in an affair with his sister, which caused embarrassment to his family. This led him to procure a pistol and other ammunitions. He also admitted to stealing a bike and altering its number to execute the crime.

7. During the investigation, the weapons used in the alleged offence, along with the fired ammunition were seized and were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for analysis. The FSL report confirmed that the bullets recovered from the body of the deceased had been fired from the weapon recovered from the accused.

8. After the completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed in the present case for offences under Sections 302/307/34 of the IPC and for offences under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.

9. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submitted that the petitioner was not present at the scene of the crime at the time of the alleged incident and that the entire case against him is based on false and fabricated evidence. He submitted that the statements of the prosecution witnesses, including the alleged eyewitness, were inconsistent and unreliable, pointing out contradictions in their testimonies recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC and during the cross-examination.

10. He submitted that the applicant had been granted interim bail on several occasions and had not misused the liberty granted to him. It was also submitted that the petitioner was a young individual with a promising future and that prolonged detention without conclusive evidence would be detrimental to his life and career.

11. Per Contra, the learned A