Satyendra Singh Chauhan, J. - (1.) This application has been moved under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur vide order dated 25.5.2017.
(2.) The incident as alleged is that complainant Dharmendra Mishra S/o Bharat Bhushan Mishra has stated in the FIR that his father Bharat Bhushan Mishra S/o Uma Shanker Mishra was going towards his petrol pump after moving from his house on 8.2.2017 at 8 am and as soon as he reached near 400KV Inspection House, two unknown persons came on motorcycle on backside near to him and they fired upon his father, as a result of which he received serious injuries and thereafter he was taken to the Trauma Centre, Lucknow, where he died. Information of the incident was lodged at 7.30 pm at Crime No.63 2017 under Sections 302/34 IPC and the bail has been granted to the accused persons on 25.5.2017. After grant of the bail, Gangsters Act was imposed upon the accused persons on 26.5.2017.
(3.) The accused persons, Santu Pandey and Raghunayak Dubey were arrested on 1.4.2017 from the Roadways Bus Station, Sultanpur and thereafter accused persons Deepak Mishra and Sandeep Mishra were arrested from Polytechnic Chauraha, Lucknow on 2.4.2017. Name of the accused Deepak Mishra came to light in the statement of accused Anil Kumar Pandey @ Santu and Deepak Mishra has revealed the name of other accused persons. It is further stated from the side of accused persons that statement made in the police custody is not admissible under Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act. Before the learned Sessions Judge, it was argued by the counsel for the complainant that the assailants were hired for an amount of Rs.20 lacs. In the statement made under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Madan Mishra has stated that near about on 25.1.2017 he went to Payagipur with some work and in the night at about 8-9 pm at Narain Dhaba he went to take dinner, where he found Pradeep Mishra, Sandeep Mishra, Deepak Mishra and Anil Kumar Pandey @ Santu to whom he knew from before and three other persons whose names they were taking, namely, Raghunayak Dubey, Amit Dubey and Aizaz and they were taking liquor and were talking that Bharat Bhushan Mishra has to be eliminated by hired shooters. Supplementary statement of the complainant was taken on 15.2.2017, in which he revealed that he was having suspicion that his family members, namely, Pradeep Kumar Mishra, Sandeep Mishra and Deepak Mishra were instrumental in getting his father killed through hired shooters, whereupon mobile numbers of the aforesaid accused persons were put on surveillance and their call detail record was prepared and CD of their voice was also prepared and the same was brought on record in regard to hiring of criminals for killing the deceased. It has also stated that even after committing this Crime, the accused persons were threatening the family members of the complainant and his nephew Anmol Mishra, regarding which an FIR was lodged under Sections 504, 506 IPC against the aforesaid three accused persons. It was further stated that the offence is grievous in nature and gravity of the offence has to be taken into consideration. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decisions of the apex court rendered in the cases of State of U.P through CBI v. Amarmani Tripathi, 2005 8 SCC 21, Satish Jaggi v. State of Chattisgarh, 2008 1 SCC(Cri) 660, Anil Kumar Tulsiani v. State of U.P. and one another, 2006 55 AllCriC 1014 (SC) and Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P.,2016 1 JIC 120 (SC).;