RAKESH KUMAR DUBEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. This application has been filed by the applicant Rakesh Kumar Dubey with a prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 332 of 2005 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 364, 302, 201 I. P. C. P. S. Kotwali Ballia District Ballia.

(2.) THE prosecution story in brief is that F. I. R. of this case has been lodged by Surya Pal Singh on 5-12- 2005 at about 2. 30 p. m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 1-12-2005 at about 4. 00 p. m. In the present case the F. I. R. was lodged under Section 365 I. P. C. but subsequently it was converted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 364, 302, 201 I. P. C. P. S. Kotwali District Ballia. THE F. I. R. was lodged against the owner of Priya Restaurant alleging therein that the deceased Shailendra Pratap Singh alias Vinod Singh, brother of the first informant, had gone to Ballia on 1-12-2006 at about 10. 00 a. m. , he was having Rs. 50,000/ -. THE deceased did not return to his house, thereafter a search was made and it was found that the deceased was having Rs. 1 lac and he was seen near Chowk at about 4 p. m. on 1-12-2005 lastly he was seen about 4. 30 p. m. in front of Priya Restaurant. THE deceased was having the relation of money dealing with the owner of Priya Restaurant. THE owner of the Priya Restaurant had also taken money as a loan from the deceased. During investigation the statement of the co-accused Rupesh Kumar Patel, was recorded, who was Accountant of the Priya Restaurant, he confessed before the Police and stated that the deceased was murdered in Priya Restaurant he was over powered by the applicant and co-accused persons and Rajesh Ranjan, the owner of Priya Restaurant cause injury by his revolver. THEreafter the dead-body was buried in a pit in the godown and the same was covered by mud and cement. THE dead-body was recovered on 10-12-2005 from the godown by digging the pit.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent he has not committed any offence but the applicant has been falsely implicated on confessional statement of the co-accused Rupesh Kumar Patel. There is no direct eye-witness account and the dead-body of the deceased was not recovered at the pointing out of the applicant. He is not named in the F. I. R. and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to local party bandi. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and the recovery of gun has been shown by the I. O. , which has been planted. The applicant was not having any motive to commit the alleged offence and he was not having any knowledge in respect of the commission of the alleged offence and the applicant is not having any criminal antecedent.