Court grants bail due to lack of compelling evidence against applicant, emphasizing socio-economic background and absence of prior criminal record.

1. This first application has been filed by the applicant under Section

483 of BNS S , 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No 437 of 2024 registered at Police Station - Shajapur Kotwali, District Shajapur (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 61, 238, 3(5) of the BNS , 2023 and Section 25 of Arms Act. Applicant is in judicial custody since

8.10.2024.

2. Heard the arguments.

3. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and the relevant material on record.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence. No offence, as alleged, is committed by the applicant. Co-accused Sohail was implicated merely on the basis of recovery of blood Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR stained cloths and knife. But the FSL report does not connect the seized cloths and knife positively as the quantity of blood was not found sufficient for determination of blood group. The DNA examination report with regard to DNA profile extracted from the nails of deceased did not match with the DNA profile extracted from the blood sample of the applicant. Learned counsel further referred to evidence of prosecution witness recorded before the trial court. Learned counsel submits that prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence of last seen. The witnesses proposed by the prosecution with regard to last seen of applicant in company of deceased, Raahil (PW-7), Shamshad (PW-8), Javed (PW-9), Chand Bi (PW-10) and Mahfooj (PW-6) did not support the prosecution. Another witness Jakir was given up by the prosecution on 8.5.2024. Further the witness of identification through CCTV footage namely Jafar (PW-1), Parvez (PW-2) and Vahid (PW-3) did not support the prosecution and declined to identify the applicant. Rajendra(PW-12) and Pravesh (PW-13) the witness of alleged seizure also did not support the prosecution. The brother of deceased, Javed (PW-4) also did not support the prosecution to prove motive for the alleged offence. Therefore, circumstances of motive, last seen together and the recovery is not proved by the prosecution. There is no likelihood of tampering with remaining evidence of investigation officer by the applicant for the reason that applicant is labourer by profession. He is not capable to influence the police official. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR bail application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. However, after going through case diary, he fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant.

6. According to the material available on case diary, dead body of Imran @ Khoparapak was recovered on 7.10.2024 on AB Road Bypass Shajapur. During investigation, it was revealed that on 6.10.2024 around 10.15 in the night, Imran went to G-9 Cafe. Around 11.30 in the night, Imran left the Cafe with Sohail. Sohail was communicating with Imran on mobile phone in the night of 6.10.2024. Sohail and Shakir were apprehended. They informed that Irfan, Shakir and Sohail had planned murder of Imran due to previous enmity. Shakir and Sohail committed murder of Imran by knife. Blood stained cloths and knife were recovered at the instance of Shakir and Sohail. CCTV footage of G-9 Cafe was recovered and seized. The call details report and tower location was requisitioned and seized. Final report was submitted on completion of investigation. The trial is underway. 14 prosecutio