BA1 No. 13 of 2017
Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J.
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocates for the
Mr. Prem Kaushal, Brief Holder for the State.
Applicant- Vijay Pal, who is in jail in connection
with F.I.R No. 209 of 2015 (S.T. No. 69 of 2016)
under Sections 302, 394 411 of I.P.C., registered
at Police Station- Kashipur, District Udham Singh
Nagar, has sought his release on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties,
considered the grounds taken up in the bail
application and perused the documents brought on
An FIR was lodged initially on 08.08.2015,
under Section 406 IPC, alleging therein that the
criminal breach of trust was committed in respect
of the truck of the reporter. Post mortem Report has
been filed in respect of some unknown deceased,
who has sustained abrasions, stitched wounds and
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted
that the applicant is not named in the FIR dated
08.08.2015. He further submitted that the
applicant was arrested by the Police in another
case, registered as FIR No. 08 of 2016, under
Sections 398 and 401 IPC and also under Section
25 Arms Act, P.S. ITI Kashipur and during the
course of investigation and during interrogation, the
applicant disclosed that he was also involved in the
loot of truck and he, along with co-accused, has
given some sleeping pills, in the liquor, to the driver
of the looted truck, namely, Avtar Singh and
murdered the driver Avtar Singh and thrown his
dead body at Surjan Nagar Thakurdwara Distt.
Moradabad. The dead body was recovered on the
next date of incident by the Police Thakurdwara. On
the basis of the disclosure made by the applicant
and on the pointing out of the accused, the truck in
question has been recovered.
It is submitted by learned Brief Holder that
there is recovery of stolen truck, which was
recovered on the pointing out of the applicant.
It is the case of circumstantial evidence, in
which the prosecution has brought out the fact that
the looted truck was recovered on the instance of
Learned counsel for the applicant questioned
the very identity of dead person, whose post mortem
report has been filed on behalf of the prosecution
and submitted that even if the entire evidence, as
produced by the prosecution, be presumed to be
true, it is not possible for the Trial Court to convict
the present applicant, on the basis of the aforesaid
evidence. The applicant was arrested on 18.01.2016
and has no previous criminal history.
It is the submission of learned counsel for the
applicant that the co-accused Dal Chand Sharma,
has already been granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 27.12.2016.
Learned counsel for the applicant further
submits that the applicant is ready to furnish
reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned, if he is enlarged on bail.
Considering the entire conspectus of things,
this Court is inclined to grant bail to the present
Let the applicant be released on bail on his
executing a personal bond and furnishing two
reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the
satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned.
If at any point of time, it is found that the
applicant is misusing the bail, the learned Court
below shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in
accordance with law.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.)