- (1.) Heard Sri N.K. Srivastava, Sri Rajesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sushil Shukla, learned counsel for the first informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused persons; that as per prosecution case, a missing report was given by Smt. Sonia wife of Kapil Gupta (hereinafter referred as K.G.) on 22.9.2011 at 1:45 p.m., stating that her husband K.G. left his office F-37, Sector-6, Noida at about 7:00 p.m. on 21.9.2011 for his residence at 349 Sector-15A, Noida by his black colored Mercedes Car No.H.R. 99TEMP 01319 but did not reach home; that the above missing report was converted into case crime no.682 of 2011 when the missing person K.G. returned home on 24.9.2011; that the first informant in her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that on 22.9.2011 at about 10:30 p.m., a call was received at mobile no.9871576860 of her Jethani Purnima from mobile no.9811055733 of her husband who informed that he has been kidnapped and asked for making arrangements of Rs.5 crores, as ransom money, failing which the kidnappers will cause his death and on his another call, when she asked him of his welfare, the phone was disconnected and again her husband called Vijay on his mobile no.9810103577 inquiring about the arrangements of Rs.5 crores, if have been made as above; that it has also been stated by the first informant that the kidnappers also talked her on mobile of Vijay and told her to hand over the ransom amount in two bags under the denomination of currency notes of Rs.1000/- and to come alone else upon informing the police even the dead body of her husband will not be traced/recovered; that it has further been stated by first informant that she sought permission from the kidnappers to come with driver, as she will not be able to come alone and when she reached the desired place with the ransom amount of Rs.5 crores in the midnight, she was further called to keep two bags on the ground and leave, and when she was returning back, in the light of vehicle seen three miscreants, who emerged out from the sugarcane fields and taken away the two bags full of currency notes worth Rs.5 crores back to sugarcane fields; that in the statement of kidnapped K.G. under section 161 Cr.P.C. at Annexure No.3 from page 23 to 25, he has narrated the story of his kidnapping and has given the names of miscreants, who were allegedly calling each other and made demand of Rs.15 crores as ransom and did not agree to reduce the demand below from Rs.5 crores; that the above kidnapped person has stated that after covering his eyes, he was dropped at Noida near Sector-15A of his residence and could reach home at about 8:00 p.m. and that he was released after taking ransom amount of Rs.5 crores.
(3.) Much emphasis has been given by learned counsel for the applicant on above statement of K.G. filed at Annexure No.3, submitting that the kidnapped person/victim has given the names of various miscreants, but did not name the applicant, as stated in para 9 of the affidavit to the bail application and so the case of applicant is clearly distinguishable; that the name of applicant has come for the first time in the confessional statement of co-accused Kapil, Vinay and Anshul (filed at Annexure No.5), upon their arrest in police party encounter under section 307 IPC on 12.10.2011 (after a period of 20 days of incident); that there is virtually no evidence against the applicant, who is a student and was studying in B.B.A. from Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, Deharadun as regular student, and copy of his mark sheet has been filed at Annexure No.6; that moreover on the date of incident of kidnapping of K.G., the applicant was at Dehradun and during a visit to Market with uncle Ravindra Malik, he met with an accident sustaining serious injuries on his face and nose and was admitted in Government Hospital at Deharadun, as mentioned in para 13 of the affidavit to bail application; that getting information of accident of applicant, his father shifted him to M.G. Hospital & Trauma Centre, Meerut, where he remained admitted for 6 days for treatment of fracture; that the father of applicant is a defence personal and due to unwanted harassment by police, he obtained compulsory retirement; that the entire prosecution story is false, concocted and highly improbable; that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of applicant and the amount of ransom money is alleged to have been recovered from other persons; that the applicant was implicated in case crime no.703 of 2011, under section 147, 148, 149, 307, IPC and case crime no.121 of 2011, under sections 364-A IPC, in both of which, he has been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 9.9.2015 and 30.10.2015 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.32631 of 2015 and 33031 of 2015, respectively, copies of which were produced for perusal during arguments; that the applicant undertakes that he will not make misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 18.12.2014.;