JITENDRA KUMAR TEWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits filed today are taken on record. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused record. The applicant is involved in Case Crime No.121 of 2008, under Sections 394, 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Mankapur, District Gonda. As against the complicity of the applicant it is submitted that in this case two F.I.Rs have been registered. The first F.I.R. was registered on 28.10.2007 at police station Mankapur by one Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi and a owner of one vehicle Bullero Turbo saying that one Vijay Singh (deceased) had taken his vehicle for servicing but he did not come back. Then on 10.11.2007 another F.I.R. was registered at police station Kotwali, District Bahraich by Smt. Jamvanti, the mother of the aforesaid Vijay Singh saying that her son was working as driver in the vehicle belonging to the aforesaid Rajesh Kumar Dwivedi (the first informant of the first F.I.R.) and her son is missing. During the course of investigation a new theory was introduced that the wife of the deceased had some intimate relation with one Maqsood belonging to Bahraich and he used to call her on telephone due to which her husband Vijay (deceased) had consumed poison but somehow he was saved after prompt treatment. Then it is said that on 21.07.2008 one Suraj Singh alias Rohit was produced before the court of C.J.M., Gonda in-connection with some other case and the wife of the deceased came to know that he is the real killer. She therefore reached there and came to know about Suraj Singh alias Rohit and two other companions including the applicant Jitendra Kumar Tewari who had taken the Bullero vehicle after booking. She then talked to all the three aforesaid persons and they confessed before her about their complicity. It is emphasized that this is the only evidence which has come till date against the applicant. The dead body of the Vijay Singh could not be traced out till now. The applicant is said to be in jail from 29.11.2008. There is no criminal history against him. The bail is, however, opposed by learned A.G.A. The points pertaining to nature of accusation, danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail, character, behaviour and position of the accused, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and without entering into the merits of the case and particularly having regard to the aforesaid evidence available till date against the applicant showing his complicity, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Jitendra Kumar Tewari) be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.