IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Gulab Singh - Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 1308 of 2023
Decided On : 07-06-2024
Bail - Judicial Custody - IPC, SC/ST Act - Sections 302, 3(2)(V) - The court condoned the delay in filing a supplementary affidavit and granted bail, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the circumstances surrounding the case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, in judicial custody for murder under IPC and SC/ST Act, sought bail after being implicated in the death of a deceased, with messages suggesting his involvement.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the lack of direct evidence against the applicant, the absence of recovery, and the need for further investigation, leading to the conclusion that bail was warranted.
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the evidence and circumstances surrounding the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the evidence presented did not sufficiently establish guilt, warranting the granting of bail.
Result: Bail application allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
Delay in filing supplementary affidavit is condoned. Supplementary affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application, IA No.3 of 2024, stands disposed of, accordingly.
2. Applicant is in judicial custody in Case Crime No.2 of 2021, Special Sessions Trial No.33 of 2022, under Sections 302 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station- Tharali, District- Chamoli. He has sought his release on bail.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. According to the FIR, on 13.10.2021, the applicant telephoned the son of the informant that the deceased was being killed by one Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar, and she should be saved. When the son of the informant reached at the spot, he found that his sister had already been killed by him. At the same time, the son of the informant received three messages from the applicant that, “I have visited the deceased and I am going to die.” In the second message, the applicant wrote that, “The guilty person, Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar, should not be spared”. And, in the third message, the applicant conveyed that, “I will die now.” The FIR records that the applicant wanted to establish physical relations with the deceased. Therefore, suspicion was raised that it is he, who killed the deceased. The FIR was lodged on 15.10.2021.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in the inquest, no suspicion has been raised on the applicant, whereas, the informant was one of the witnesses of the inquest; there has been no recovery.
6. Learned State Counsel would submit that there is one eye witness, Suresh Kumar, who has been examined at the trial. He has stated that when he reached at the place of incident, his sister was still alive, and he had seen the applicant running away from that place. It is submitted that the place, where PW2, Suresh Kumar, received the message, is 500 metres away from the place, where the dead body of the deceased was found.
7. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial, or in any other proceeding.
8. The Court had required earlier learned State Counsel to place the transcript of the messages, which PW2, Suresh Kumar, received. It is stated that the messages could not be retrieved. According to the FIR, PW2, Suresh Kumar, received three messages. One, that the deceased was being killed by one Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar, and second, that the guilty person, Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar, should not be spared. PW2, Suresh Kumar, has not stated, as such, about the messages in his examination before the court. What is stated is that when he reached at the place of incident, the applicant was running away there. This is not so stated in the FIR.
9. What is the connection of Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar with the applicant and the deceased? Why PW2, Suresh Kumar, received messages from the applicant that the guilty person, Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar, should not be spared? What was the guilt of Mehrbaan Singh alias Subedar? These and many more questions would find answer during trial.
10. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
11. The bail application is allowed.
12. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
The court established that insufficient evidence and the need for further investigation justified the granting of bail.
In bail proceedings, the presence of multiple eyewitnesses and corroborative video evidence outweighed concerns regarding delay in lodging the FIR, justifying the court's decision to reject bail.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the medical reports and the finding of the Medical Board at AIIMS Rishikesh, which suggested suicidal hanging as the cause of death.
In the absence of direct evidence linking the applicant to the crime, and where the prosecution's case relies on circumstantial evidence, bail may be granted.
Bail may be denied in cases involving serious offenses where there is substantial evidence against the accused, particularly in instances of domestic violence.
The court established that in cases involving serious allegations, the nature of the relationship between the accused and the victim, as well as the victim's statements, play a crucial role in determ....
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 ....
Bail is a rule and imprisonment is an exception; the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt for bail denial.
Murder - Bail Rejected - It is case of brutal murder and chain of linked evidences is not missing - Purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression ....
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.