Yogesh @ Yogendra (In Jail) vs C.B.I.

Ravindra Singh, J.—This bail application has been filed by the applicant Yogesh alias Yogendra with a prayer that he may be released on bail in C.C. No. RC-1 l(S)/2007 under Sections 120B, 364, 384, 302 and 201 I.P.C. P.S. SCU V/SCR II C.B.I. New Delhi.

The prosecution story in brief is that an F.I.R. was lodged by Satish Kumar, brother of the deceased, on 29.10.2006 at P.S. Syana district Bulandshahar in Case Crime No. 157 of 2006 alleging therein that the deceased Dr. Kavita Rani, lecturer in Chaudhary Charna Singh, University. Meerut had gone to her village Dhansurpur district Bulandshahar on 19.10.2006 to attend Diwali formal. On 23.10.2006 when she was retuning back to Meerut she disappeared and her whereabouts could not be known, all the three cell phones No. 931961612140, 9997123627, 98377701434 were switched off. Its information was given at P.S. Syana on 29.10.2006, Thereafter, the police of P.S. Syana made search of the room of the deceased in Indra Gandhi Mahila Chhatrawas, Meerut on 1.11.2006 and some letters written by the deceased were taken in possession in which the name of co-accused Ravindra Pradhan and his brother Harendra Pradhan was also mentioned along with the name and phone numbers of other persons. In these letters, threat was given to the deceased and her family members by the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan on the telephone and she was asked to marry with him otherwise she and her family members would be done to death. It was suspected that she was abducted and killed by the above mentioned persons. Thereafter, the matter was transferred to P.S. Civil Lines, on the point of territorial jurisdiction, where it was registered on 22.12.2006 in Case Crime No. 478 of 2006. Thereafter, investigation was transferred by the Government to C.B.I., where it was registered as C.C. No. RC-1 1(S)/2007 in which charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. Now the matter is pending in the court of learned Special Judge C.B.I. (Anti Corruption) U.P. (East) Ghaziabad vide S.T. No. 428 of 2007. It is alleged that the applicant and other co-accused persons hatched a conspiracy in furtherance of that conspiracy Dr. Kavita Rani was abducted and killed. The co-accused Ravindra Pradhan and the deceased prepared a CD. having sexual relation of the deceased with Dr. Mirajuddin Ahamed, the then Minister of U.P. Government and on the basis of that CD, Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad was black mailed and in lieu of return of that C.D. Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad paid an amount of Rs. 35,00.000/- to the applicant, the CD. was brought by the applicant from the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan and it was handed over to Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad. During investigation the statements of Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad, Ashu alias Amit, Vijay Pal and Rajesh Kumar Yadav and some other persons were recorded by the C.B.I, and from the possession of the applicant, memory chip containing video recording of sexual intimacy between the deceased Dr. Kavita Rani was also recovered on 20.12.2006 and one CD. containing video recording of sexual intimacy between the deceased and Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad was seized from the house of Amar Malik, an advocate of Mathura on the disclosure of the applicant.

Heard Sri Brijesh Sahai, learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri G.S. Hajela. learned Counsel for the C.B.I.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. even there is no evidence of the deceased, even there is no circumstantial evidence to show that the applicant was involved in the commission of abduction and murder of the deceased. The only allegation against the applicant is that he brought the CD. having video film of sexual intimacy of the deceased with Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad and the same was handed over to Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad, and in lieu of that Rs. 35.00.000/- were given by Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad to the applicant. There is no other evidence against the applicant to connect him with the commission of the alleged offence. The applicant is having inimical relation with the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan who is the main accused of this case in such circumstances, the allegation made against the application for realising the extracted amount from Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad is not believable. The applicant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also surprising that Dr. Kavita Rani either alive or dead has not been recovered till today. There is no evidence against the applicant. The applicant is having no criminal antecedent. Therefore, he maybe released on bail.

In reply to the above contention it is submitted by the Sri G.S. Hajela that it is a case grave in nature in which the deceased Dr. Kavita Rani has been abducted and killed in a pre-planed manner by hatching a conspiracy, the applicant is actually involved, he is one of the conspirators, the deceased has been abducted and killed only on the ground that extracted money of Rs. 35,00.000/-. During investigation the evidence has been collected to show that other co-accused persons hatched a conspiracy and in furtherance of that conspiracy she was abducted and killed. The applicant is actively involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The allegation against the applicant is that on the basis of compact disk (CD.) showing Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad, the then Minister of U.P. Government, involved in sex with Dr. Kavita Rani given to the applicant by the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan and the same was handed over by the applicant to Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad and he had collected the extracted amount of Rs. 35,00.000/- from Dr. Mirajuddin.Ahmad. It has come in evidence that Rs. 1,0000/- was given to the applicant out of the amount realised by him from Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad. During investigation the statement of Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad was recorded. He made allegation against the applicant by stating that he was black mailed on the basis of the CD. having his intimate relationship with the deceased Dr. Kavita Rani and demanded Rs. 50,00.000/- in lieu of that CD. but he was not agree ultimately the deal was settled for Rs. 35,00.000/-. The same was paid to him, who is a trusted person of the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan. The applicant and Ashok Kumar was sent at his Lucknow residence by the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan where the above mentioned CD. was handed over to him and the money was paid by hip) to the applicant at Noida near Kalandipur crossing in a suit case containing Rs. 35.00.000/- The statement of Amit Kumar was also recorded by the C.B.I. who supported the statement of Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad. The statement of the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan was recorded who made the confessional statement, the statement of Sultan Singh was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C who also supported the prosecution story by stating that poison was given to the deceased in juice on 23.10.2006 by the co-accused Ravindra Pradhan and Ravindra driver. Thereafter she was taken to the bank of a Canal, her cloths were put off and the dead body of the deceased tied with a stone was thrown into the canal. The statement of Vijay Pal Singh also recorded according to his statement the deceased and co-accused Ravindra Pradhan stayed at the education institution in the night of 23.10.2006. In support of his statement the statement of Rajesh Kumar Yadav was recorded and the memory chip containing the video recording of sexual intimacy was recovered from the possession of the applicant and on its disclosure CD. containing the video recording of sexual intimacy between the deceased and Dr. Mirajuddin was seized from Amur Malik, an advocate of Mathura. The applicant is a trusted person of co-accused Ravindra Pradhan who is master mind of this case. In the present case two dead bodies have been recovered, the D.N.A. test has been done and the same has been sent to the expert for matching with the D.N.A. profile of the parents of Dr. Kavita Rani, the result is awaited. In the present case, investigation in respect of the other co-accused is going on, it is a case of high profile, in case the applicant is released on bail, he shall tamper with the evidence and he may interfere with the fair investigation in respect of other co-accused also. The applicant has not come with clean hands. He has suppressed the material fact. The gravity of the offence is too much. Therefore, he may not be released on bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and Sri G.S. Hajela, learned Counsel for C.B.I, and form the perusal of the record it appears that this case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is specific allegation against the applicant that he is also a member of the conspiracy and he has handed over the CD. to Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad and in lieu of that he obtained Rs. 35,00.000/- from Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad and from his possession memory chip of such CD. has been recovered and at his disclosure a CD. containing video recording of sexual intimacy of Dr. Mirajuddin Ahmad with the deceased has been seized from Amar Milik, an advocate of Mathura. In the present case, high profile politicians and criminals are involved in which a lecturer of the University has been abducted and killed, the gravity of the offence is too much and to ensure fair trial, it shall not be proper to release the applicant on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is not entitled for bail. The prayer for bail is refused.

Accordingly this application is rejected.