IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Mayank Kumar Jain, J.
Jay Kant Bajpai @ Jay – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. – Opposite Party
Criminal Misc. Bail application No. - 30712 of 2021
Decided On : 30-05-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 333, 302, 342, 364, 395, 307, 396, 412, 120-B, 34, 504, 506 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 161 - Explosive Substance Act - Section 3, 4 - Criminal Law Amendment Act - Section 7 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32 - Offence of Murder - Bail Application - Held, Applicant is actively involved in incident in which eight police personnel including to death mercilessly and seven others police personnel received grievous injury - Applicant actually assisted main accused by providing cartridges to be used in incident - Applicant also promised and provided vehicles to slain accused Vikas Dubey for his safe journey to his next destination after committing most heinous crimes - Court not find any sufficient reason to allow bail application of present applicant - Order Accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Nazrul Islam Jafri (Senior Advocate) assisted by Sri Deepak Singh and Sri Shiva Kant Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Abhijeet Mukherjee for the State.
2. Perused the record.
3. Present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Jay Kant Bajpai @ Jay in Case Crime No. 192 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 333, 307, 302, 396, 412, 120-B, 34, 504, 506 of I.P.C.; Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3/4 of Explosive Substance Act, Police Station Chaubeypur, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail during the trial.
4. As per the version of the prosecution, case crime No. 191/2020 u/s 147,148,504,323,364,342,307 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act was registered at Police Station Chaubepur, District Kanpur Outer on 02.07.2020 at 23:52 PM against Vikas Dubey and 4 other named accused on the basis of First Information Report lodged by one Rahul Tiwari. He alleged that on 01.07.2020 at 12:30 PM, the accused beat him up. The accused kidnapped him and confined him in a room. He somehow escaped from there. When he reached Vikroo turn, Bela road, Vikas Dubey fired upon him indiscriminately. He did not sustain any injury.
5. In order to arrest the named accused in the aforesaid FIR, the police party led by SHO Chaubepur, Vinay Kumar Tiwari, reached Vikroo. When they reached at the gate of the house of accused Vikas Dubey, named and unnamed accused in the present F.I.R. fired indiscriminately upon the police officers with firearm weapons. In this heart wrenching incident, 8 police personnel were brutally done to death including Circle officer and 7 police personnel got serious injuries. Accused persons looted the arms from the police personnel. The first information report of the incident was lodged by Sub Inspector Vinay Kumar Tiwari, the then SHO, P.S. Chaubepur, District Kanpur Outer on 03.07.2020 at 5:30 AM against 21 named and 60-70 unnamed accused.
6. During the course of the investigation, on the basis of the statement of the main accused Vikas Dubey, it was revealed that the applicant was present in a meeting with Vikas Dubey and other accused persons in the evening of 02.07.2020 to carve out a plan to commit the murder of police persons who were scheduled to approach the slain leader Vikas Dubey to arrest him. The applicant had provided money and ammunition to the main accused Vikas Dubey. To provide safe passage to slain accused Vikas Dubey to perform journey, the applicant promised to provide vehicles after killing the police party.
7. These facts were narrated by Vikas Dubey, the main accused of Vikroo massacre, when he was being brought to Kanpur Nagar from Ujjain, where he was arrested by the Madhya Pradesh Police. He was interrogated by the Investigating Officer during his journey from Ujjain to Kanpur Nagar. The statement of Vikas Dubey was noted in the case diary by the investigating officer. Apart from this, co-accused Prashant Kumar Shukla and Vipul Dubey also stated active involvement of the present applicant in the Vikroo massacare. The statement of the applicant was also recorded by the investigating officer in which he admitted that he had provided money and ammunitions to Vikas Dubey. He also provided vehicle to him for his safe journey after the incident.
8. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is not named in the first information report. None of the witness referred the involvement of the applicant in the incident that happened on 02.07.2020 at Vikroo. The applicant has been made accused in the present case only on the basis of his confessional statement and the statement of co-accused Prashant Shukla which were recorded in police custody. The statements of applicant and co-accused Prashant Shukla are not admissible in evidence and
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar Vs. Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav and Another (2004) 7 SCC 528
The decision emphasized the importance of considering the nature of the offence, severity of the punishment, and the likelihood of the accused interfering with the process of justice when deciding on....
Though liberty is a greatly cherished value in life of an individual, it is a controlled and restricted one and no element in society can act in a manner by consequence of which life or liberty of ot....
The principle of parity cannot be the sole basis for bail; serious evidence against the accused warrants denial of bail despite prolonged incarceration.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to crosscheck the truthfulness of allegations, the relevance of confessional statements made by co-accused in different cases, and the con....
The court upheld the trial court's rejection of bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges and the sufficiency of evidence against the applicant.
Repeated offenders who commit crimes while on bail should not be granted bail, and the trial should be expedited. The nature of offenses and the general conduct of the accused are crucial factors in ....
Criminal history of an accused in itself cannot be the basis of refusal of prayer for bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.