Court No. - 53

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32813 of 2020

Applicant :- Vishal Tyagi

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajrshi Gupta

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Dheeraj Kumar Singh

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.

Counter affidavit on behalf of the State, filed in Court today, is also taken on

record.

Heard leaned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant,

learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material brought on

record.

The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime

No. 624/2018, under Sections 302/201 IPC, police station Bisrakh, District

Gautam Budh Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. The first

bail application of application was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order

dated 28.02.2020 passed by this Court.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-

applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was

submitted that deceased is cousin of applicant and that applicant has no motive

to cause his death. It was also submitted that as per prosecution version, alleged

incident has taken place at the flat of applicant and that CCTV footage were

collected from the building of the flat, where allegedly incident has taken place,

but the Investigating Officer did not bring the same on record and that there is

absolutely no evidence that applicant has taken out the dead body of the

deceased from the said flat. It has further been submitted that as per prosecution

version, dead body of deceased was recovered on 11.06.2018 near ISKCON

Temple, Vrindavan and that it was brought there by a OLA cab but the statement

of driver of said OLA cab has been recorded after one week of the alleged

incident and that no explanation for delay in recording his statement has been

shown. Learned counsel has submitted that there is absolutely no evidence that

applicant has committed murder of deceased and that there is also no

independent witness of recovery of dead body from the applicant. Learned

counsel has further submitted that in fact applicant is the only son of his parents

and that mother of applicant has already expired and that applicant has been

falsely implicated as informant and his family want to grab the property of

applicant. It has further been submitted that co-accused Manoj @ Kuttu has

already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, copy of which

has been produced and the same is taken on record. It was further argued that the

applicant is in judicial custody since 11.06.2018 having no criminal history and

that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the

liberty of bail.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the

complainant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant and co-

accused Paurush Samadhiya were apprehended by the police at the alleged spot

while they were carrying the dead body of the deceased in a gunny bag with

intention to dispose of the same. It was submitted by learned counsel for the

complainant that as per FIR, blood was oozing out from the said gunny bag in

which the dead body of deceased was lying. Learned counsel for the informant

has further submitted that though the cause of death of deceased is strangulation,

but after murder of deceased his body was cut into two pieces and was put in a

gunny bag and while it was being carried by applicant and co-accused Paurush

Samadhiya, police have apprehended them and thus it is for the applicant to

explain as to how the deceased has met death. It was further submitted that

deceased has been brutally murdered by the applicant and that co-accused

Manoj @ Kuttu, who has already been enlarged on bail, was neither named in

the FIR nor he was apprehended at the alleged spot of recovery.

After cons