Baljeet Singh Alias Jot vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This Second Bail Application has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information Report No.189 of 2019, registered with Police Station Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence under Sections 302, 120 B, 34 of IPC and Section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The First Bail Application (BA1 No.986 of 2020) was rejected on 16.06.2021.

The informant Nitesh Kumar lodged an FIR against the present applicant-accused along with three named co-accused and some unknown persons. According to the First Information Report, the informant is a member of the Scheduled Caste. His father purchased a land, measuring 1.5 acres from one Janardan Dubey, Tarkeshwar Dubey and Hari Krishna Dubey. The said land was in the possession of the informant up to the year, 2018. The said land is lying vacant since the year, 2019. The co-accused Manoj Dubey was having enmity with the informant due to the land dispute. The co-accused Manoj Dubey used to threaten to kill him and his two brothers. The said co-accused always abused them using caste indicating words. The younger brother of the informant, namely, Mayank, was posted as a Constable in the Police Station Madhav Tanda, District Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh. He had come home on leave. On 13.08.2019, the informant and his brother Mayank went to Gadarpur for their personal work. They reached Khalsa Dhaba for settling their land dispute. Mayank went inside the Dhaba. The informant was standing outside. He heard the sound of the gunshots. He went inside the Dhaba and saw that his brother Mayank was lying on the ground drenched in blood. At that time, three persons had run away from inside the Dhaba. The co-accused Manoj Dubey along with the present applicant shot and killed his brother Mayank at around 8:30 hrs. The FIR was registered at 8:30 hrs. on 13.08.2019. After investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed.

Heard Mr. Vikas Anand, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Mr. S.T. Bhardwaj, the learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mrs. Shivangi Gangwar, the learned Brief Holder for the State.

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant, submitted that after rejection of the First Bail Application, statements of the prosecution’s witnesses were recorded; the informant-Nitesh Kumar (PW1) did not support the case of the prosecution; the alleged recovery was planted; the applicant is in custody since 17.08.2019; he is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar, and, co-accused persons of the similar role, have been granted bail by this High Court.

The learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State, opposed the bail application orally. However, he fairly conceded that four co-accused persons of the similar role, have been granted bail by this High Court.

Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

Having considered the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant-Baljeet Singh alias Jot be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he will not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.