KAMLESH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashwini Prakash Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the version as in the FIR is that a dead body of an unknown female aged about 30 years is lying in the canal which was seen by the first informant on 11.05.2020 at about 10.00 a.m. The said information was subsequently registered as FIR on 13.05.2020 against unknown person. Prior to the registration of the FIR the inquest on the body of the deceased was conducted as an unknown female. It is further argued that subsequently, on 12.05.2020 a police informer informed the Investigating Officer that there is a discussion in the village that the dead body which was recovered is of Poonam the daughter of Ramesh of village Deewan Ka Purva. The said information was recorded in the CD on 12.05.2020, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure- 4 to the affidavit. Subsequently, Ramesh gave an application to the police, the same is annexed as Annexure- 5 to the affidavit mentioning therein that his daughter, Poonam was unwell and some medicine was given by one Ram Babu to her which was consumed by her after which her condition deteriorated and later on, she died. Subsequently, he with his wife went to Ram Babu who told them that he has not given any medicine and further instructed them the manner of cremation on which they took the dead body in a gunny bag and immersed it in Ramganga Nahar.

(3.) Learned counsel has further drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure- 10 of the affidavit which is the statement of Ramesh the father of the deceased who was made as an accused and it is argued that he has given a confession to the police that he has murdered his daughter. It is further argued that subsequently, on 17.05.2020 one Ramu and Vijendra were interrogated who have stated that on 08.05.2020 at about 12:40 a.m. they saw the applicants, Vijay Shanker, Ramesh and Akhilesh going somewhere together. The said statements are annexed as Annexure- 11 to the affidavit. It is argued that the police informer informed the police that the murder of Poonam has been committed by her mother, Smt. Shivkali and brother, Akhilesh by strangulating her which was given assistance by her father, Ramesh and the applicants along with Vijay Shanker were called and they had assisted in the disposal of the dead body. The said parcha is Annexure- 12 to the affidavit. It is further argued that later on, on 21.05.2020 Ajay Bhan Singh, Chhotey Lal and Ajay Kumar were interrogated by the Investigating Officer and their statements were recorded which are Annexure- 13 to the affidavit in which they have stated that on the fateful night they saw Akhilesh taking Poonam on his bicycle who was caught by Vijay Shanker and Naresh, Ramesh and Kamlesh were also going with them. It is thus argued that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence without any eye-witness account. The implication of the applicant is false and without any substantive evidence. It is further argued that the police has shown a recovery of a cloth allegedly used to murder the deceased on the pointing out of co-accused, Akhilesh. The said recovery memo is annexed as Annexure- 15 to the affidavit. It is argued that the applicants have no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. They have been falsely implicated in the matter.