Point of Law: Service Matter - Minor Punishment - Appeal - As per Rules of 1991 a delinquent employee who is awarded minor punishments of censure entries under Rule 4 (b) can file an appeal under Rule 20 of Rules of 1991 within a period of three months.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Raghuvansh Misra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri S.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the informant who are present virtually through video conferencing and learned AGA for the State who is present in the Court.

2. This bail application has been given by accused-applicant Mohd. Sharib in Case Crime No.1369 of 2018, under Section 302/120B IPC, P.S.-Kotwali Nagar, District – Bulandshahar.

3. The FIR has been lodged by informant Mohd. Yunus on 13.10.2018 in respect of incident dated 9.10.2018/10.10.2018 in the night and the allegation is that the deceased was an Ex-MLA and was living in Bulandshahar. In the morning, till 11 AM, door of his bedroom did not open and therefore, after breaking the window, members of his family and others opened the door which was locked from inside. The deceased was found lying on the bed in bleeding condition and there was gun shot injury on his head. The informant suspected that some unknown person killed him and lodged FIR against unknown. On the basis of FIR, the investigation started, the inquest report was prepared and post-mortem of dead body was undertaken. Investigating Officer investigated the offence and finding no evidence submitted Final Report. Re-investigation was conducted by CBCID. Evidence was collected and charge-sheet was filed against the accused applicant and others under aforesaid sections.

4. Submission of the learned Senior counsel is that there is no reason for the accused applicant to commit murder of the deceased, he was not named in the FIR and it was not even suspected in the FIR that he might have committed the murder of the deceased. There was no motive available to the applicant. In the initial statement recorded by IO, nothing was stated against him. Subsequently, in order to implicate the applicant, evidence was manipulated, false evidence was created and certain witnesses were reexamined who made improvement to implicate the accused applicant. There is no criminal history of the accused applicant. He was doing the work of guard and was for the protection of the deceased. There is no reliable evidence against him in support of the police version. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed after police investigation and applicant is prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, therefore, there is no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence. Applicant is languishing in jail since 19.03.2020 and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and cooperate in trial.

5. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the informant and learned AGA for the State have strongly opposed the bail application and have submitted that the matter was investigated and after collecting enough evidence it was found that the accused applicant committed murder in a very planned way. It has been further submitted that there is extra judicial confession made to witness Mohd. Khalid who has stated to the IO that while he was on his saw applicant Sharib and servant Sajid came there and made a confessional statement that out of greed and on the saying of Anas, the son of deceased, they killed the deceased. Further submission is that there are other evidence on record which is in the nature of circumstances which conclusively indicated the involvement of the accused applicant in the commission of the offence.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for informant side has submitted that the deceased with the accused were going to Delhi from Aligarh and it was the accused applicant who insisted for stay in Bulandshahar. On his pursuance, the deceased agreed to stay in Bulandshahar where his wife resides. In the evidence it has come that the accused and the deceased both slept in the same room and the key of the room was always with the accused applicant. After committing the murder the accused p