Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60833 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18031 of 2022 Applicant :- Om Chandra Gupta @ Pawan Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Bhardwaj,Rajrshi Gupta,Rizwan Ahamad,Vinay Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pushpendra Kumar Yadav,Rajiv Lochan Shukla Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Rizwan Ahamad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pushpendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Om Chandra Gupta @ Pawan Gupta, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 6 of 2021, under Sections 302, 120B/34 IPC, registered at P.S. G.R.P., District- Jaunpur. 4. The prosecution case as per the F.I.R. lodged on 02.2.2021 at about 02.10 hours by Jitendra Yadav naming Sunil Yadav, Rakesh Yadav, Lal Pratap Yadav and some unknown persons, is that his brother Bala Lakhandar Yadav @ Bala Yadav was a corporater and was also involved in the business of land. Sunil Yadav, Rakesh Yadav and Lal Pratap Yadav had enmity with him. The said persons with some other accused persons have conspired together and were keeping a watch at his brother Bala Yadav prior to his murder. Prior to the incident they had also extended threat to him. On 1.2.2021 at about 8.00 P.M. the said accused persons along with some other accused persons, who were lying in wait for his brother Bala Yadav, murdered him on the corner of city railway station. The murder of his brother has been committed by the accused persons with deep conspiracy with some other accused persons and with their help. Ashu, Phool Chandra, Arvind, Dharmendra saw the incident and know about it. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is submitted that the present case is a case of circumstantial evidence. It is submitted that the F.I.R. names three accused persons namely Sunil Yadav, Rakesh Yadav, Lal Pratap Yadav and some unknown persons and subsequently police informer after inquiring about the incident informed that murder has been committed by Om Chandra Gupta@Pawan Gupta (the present applicant) and Umesh Gaur along with two other miscreants. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material from the possession of the applicant. It is submitted that informer further states that three accused persons named in the F.I.R. have not committed the murder but Om Chandra Gupta and Umesh Gaur along with two other persons have committed the murder. The said information was passed on to the police for which C.D. dated 04.02.2021 states about the same, after which the applicant has been made an accused in the present matter. It is submitted that the applicant has no motive to commit the aforesaid offence. It is submitted while placing para-4 of the supplementary affidavit dated 24.10.2024 that the applicant has been falsely implicated in 06 other cases, the details of which have been disclosed and explained in the said paragraph. It is submitted that in two cases the applicant is on bail, in two cases Final Reports have been submitted whereas in one case under Section 302 I.P.C., the applicant has been convicted by the trial court after which he has filed an appeal before this Court in which he has been granted bail vide order dated 04.11.2022. It is submitted that the trial in the present matter has started in which the statement of Jitendra Kumar Yadav has been recorded as P.W.- 1, the same is annexed as annexure no. 1 to the 5th Supplementary Affidavit dated 16.1.2025. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 10.2.2021 and he be released on bail. 6. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is actively involved in the present case. It is submitted that arguments of learned counsel for the applicant that there is no recovery from the possession or pointing out of the applicant is factually incorrect inasmuch from his possession one country- made pistol and two live cartridges were recovered. It is submitted that the applicant is having criminal history of six cases and in one case under Section 302 I.P.C., he has been convicted by the trial court and appeal against it is pending before this Court in which he has been granted bail. It is submitted that implication of the applicant has surfaced in the present matter during investigation and the applicant is stated to be the main person who has committed the present offence. It is submitted that the prayer for bail be rejected. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that although the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. but his implication has surfaced during investigation. The argument of learned counsel for the applicant that there is no recovery from the possession or pointing out of the applicant, is false as there is recovery of a country-made pistol and two live cartridges from the possession of the applicant. The applicant has criminal history of six cases which have been disclosed in the said supplementary affidavit, in one case under Section 302 I.P.C. he has been convicted by the trial court. 8. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 16.4.2025 Naresh Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad