Vazir And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

These two Criminal Appeals have arisen from a common judgment dated 14.06.2022, passed by the learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Sessions Trial No.377 of 2014, “State vs. Vazir and Others”, by which, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, “IPC”); they have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, and, they have been further convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each for the offence under Section 404 IPC. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

Miscellaneous Application (IA No.02 of 2022) (objection(s) to the bail application), is taken on record.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, learned counsel for the appellants, submitted that the appellants have been falsely implicated; before recovery of two skeleton, police were present at the sight of the recovery, and, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.

On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail applications and submitted that according to the prosecution case, there were love relationship between the deceased, aged about 15 years, the daughter of the informant and the deceased – Sajid; the skeleton of the deceased daughter of the informant along with her clothes, slippers and a skeleton of the deceased – Sajid along with his clothes were recovered at the pointing out of the appellants, and, the D.N.A. of the deceased persons have matched with the D.N.A. of the blood of the mother and the father of the deceased persons.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State, further submitted that the prosecution has examined eighteen witnesses and they have supported the case of the prosecution.

At the stage of assessing whether the case is fit for the grant of bail, the Court is not required to enter into the detailed analysis of the evidence on record. At this stage, detailed appreciation of evidence shall affect the merits of the case. If a strong prima facie ground is disclosed for substantial doubt about the conviction, it may be a ground to grant bail. Such a ground does not appear in the present case. Therefore, both the bail applications have no merit. The bail applications are rejected.

List these Appeals on 16.05.2023 for final disposal.

A copy of this order be placed on the record of Criminal Appeal No.292 of 2022.

Urgent certified copy of this order be provided to the parties, as per Rules.