Relevant facts ought to have been placed before Allahabad High Court: Apex Court sets aside order granting bail to two for police constable’s murder
Justices Vikram Nath & Sanjay Kumar [19-04-2024]

Read Order: JADUNATH SINGH v. ARVIND KUMAR & ANR. ETC [SC- CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 2170 OF 2024]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, April 23, 2024: In a case of murder of apolice constable, the Supreme Court has set aside the order of the Allahabad High Court granting bail to two accused despite their period of incarceration being more than 10 years. The Apex Court, however, upheld the bail order of the third accused as he was not charge sheeted in the matter.

The factual background of this case was that on 11.02.2011, theappellant/Complainant- Jadunath Singh submitted a Written Report narrating that a plot was illegally taken by Arvind Kumar (accused- respondent). He was removed from its illegal possession by Rajvir, son of the Complainant, in accordance with the order of District Magistrate.On the same day that this incident took place, the Complainant Jadunath Singh along with his son Rajvir, Pawan Kumar, Rawan Kumar, Upendra, Chedalal were sitting together, discussing the disputed plot. At this time, Arvind Kumar, armed with country made pistol, his two sons- Chandra Kumar @ Chandu armed with katta and Rishi Kumar armed with katta along with Amit Kumar, armed with a rifle and two unknown persons with rifles, arrived there and immediately opened fire at the complainant and all other persons sitting with him.

The Complainant and others ran but they werechased by accused persons along with continuous firing. They managed to intrude in the room in which Rajvir and Pawan entered while hiding and escaping from the shots. There the accused aimed at Rajvir and Pawan, shot them dead and thus caused the death of both these victims and also injured daughter in law of Harvilas, causing injuries upon her. Thereafter the accused persons fled away. The injured persons were taken to Hospital.On the basis of the complaint given by Jadunath Singh (Appellant), FIR was registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 120B of IPC against five named accused and two unknown. After investigation Chargesheet was submitted against all the seven accused.

The Trial Court convicted five accused namely Arvind Kumar, Chandra Kumar, Pramod Kashyap, Rishi Kumar and Aadesh Kumar under Section 302/149, 147, 148 and 120-B of IPC and awarded life sentence. It, however, acquitted two other accused namely Monu and Amit Kumar of all the charges.

Another criminal case involving some of the present convicted accused came into light. In the year 2013, two accused viz Rishi Kumar and Chandra Kumar were produced before Sessions Court at Mainpuri, while in judicial custody by Constable Ajay Kumar. The two accused persons requested the police constable to take them out for attending natures call. As soon as they moved out from the Court campus, the two accused opened fire on said police constable due to which said constable died on the spot and thereafter his dead body was thrown by the accused persons in front of the house of one Munshi Lal. Consequently, an FIR was registered under Section 302 IPC against eight accused persons under Sections 302, 201, 120B, 34, 224 of IPC, with allegation that all eight accused hatched conspiracy for committing murder of Police Constable. The accused Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar absconded and were later on arrested by STF from Maharashtra where also they had opened fire on the police party for which a separate FIR was lodged.

The appellant had approached the Top Court challenging a common Order passed by Allahabad High Court whereby the three Applicants- Arvind Kumar, Chandra Kumar @ Chandu and Rishi Kumar were granted bail during the pendency of their Criminal appeals, with condition of furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs50,000each. The Appellant-Complainant challenged the order of granting bail on the ground that after being released from jail, they will hatch another conspiracy for eliminating the complainant and his family members.

As per the Division Bench of Justice Vikram Nath &Justice Sanjay Kumar, there were certain facts which were not placed before the High Court. These were the facts relating to the murder of Ajay Kumar Police Constable in whose custody the accused Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar were produced before the Trial Court at Mainpuri and further, the fact that they had absconded after throwing the dead body of deceased Constable Ajay Kumar and later on arrested by Special Task Force (STF) from Maharashtra. Another fact was that they had resisted their arrest and opened fire on the police party for which a separate case was registered.

These were relevant facts which ought to have been placed before the High Court. The parity mentioned by the High Court in the impugned order relating to Adesh Kumar and Pramod Kashyap was clearly distinguishable not only with respect to their role in the case in hand but also, they were not involved in the murder of Police Constable, the Bench held.

The Top Court opined, “In our considered opinion, two accused respondents namely Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar despite their period of incarceration of more than 10 years would not be entitled to grant of bail for their subsequent conduct for which they are facing separate trial.”

Insofar as Arvind Kumar was concerned, the Bench noted that he was not charge sheeted in the murder case of Ajay Kumar and thus, no interference was warranted with the order of the High Court granting bail to him i.e. Arvind Kumar. However, insofar as the other two accused Rishi Kumar and Chandra Kumar were concerned, the Bench was of the view that their bail deserved to be cancelled.

Accordingly, Bench dismissed the appeal against Arvind Kumar and allowed the appeals against Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar are allowed.