BHARAT BALMIKI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the lower court record.

(2.) The appellant Bharat Valmiki has moved the bail application, in the criminal appeal which has been filed by him against the judgement and order dated 22.2.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr in S.T. No. 933 of 2009 whereby the appellant has been convicted under sections 302, 364, 201 IPC, with a prayer that he may be released on bail during the pendency of this appeal.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and from the perusal of the lower court record it reveals that in the present case the conviction of the appellant is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence. It reveals that written report was given to the police station by Amar Singh on 8.6.2009 at 3.05 P.M. alleging therein that his son deceased Babloo @ Chandra Bhan aged about 28 years was driver of a Maruti Van No. DL-4-CA-3322 of Shivam Public School and he was residing at house of his Phufa Prem Pal. On 1.6.2009 at about 3.00 P.M. a telephonic message was given from cell No. 9897853756 by Dharamveer Sharma to Sachin, the Phufera brother of the deceased on his cell No. 9761563138 for sending the Babloo in his house to go some where. Thereafter the deceased Babloo went Dharamveer Sharma but he did not return up to evening, thereafter Sachin, the Phufera brother of the deceased enquired about the deceased from Dharamveer Sharma who disclosed that the deceased was taken by the appellant along with his Maruti Van at the pretext of attending the funeral at village Dharaau. Thereafter Sachin and Dharam Veer Sharma went to village Dharaau to know the whereabouts of the deceased where they came to know that no death had occurred there. On 2.6.2009 at about 8.00 A.M. the deceased have telephonic talk to Dharamveer Sharma through cell phone No. 9258146272 and stated that he was at Ganga and would be return up to evening. On 4.6.2009 the maruti Van was found on road in abandoned condition. But no whereabouts of the deceased and Bharat Valmiki could be known. The appellant was apprehended by the police who made a confessional statement on 14.6.2009 by submitting that after committing the murder of the deceased the dead body was thrown in a Naala. On the disclosure made by the appellant, the appellant was brought to the place where the dead body was kept, the appellant came done to Naala, he taken out the skeleton and chocolate colour shirt and a pant of the grey colour. At 6.35 P.M. on 14.6.2009 its recovery memo was prepared and thereafter inquest report was prepared and post mortem examination was done. The skeleton was not having any flesh. At the stage of the trial six witnesses from the prosecution side have been examined. The statement of the appellant was recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C. but no evidence in the defence was adduced. The skeleton was identified with the clothes of the deceased. P.W. 8 Sonu has been examined whose evidence is of the last seen. The appellant was on bail during pendency of the trial. There is no allegation of mis-use of the bail. In such circumstances, we feel it proper to release the appellant on bail.