Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11960 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9883 of 2024 Appellant :- Rajesh Gupta Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sachin Kanaujiya,Shivam Kanojiya Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Rajesh Gupta with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 6.9.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad and to release the appellant on bail in case crime no. 214 of 2024 under Sections 302, 201, 120-B IPC and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. 4. Prosecution story, as unfolded in the F.I.R., is that the deceased Manoj, son of the informant, performed his marriage with Radha without taking consent of his family and was living with her. On 9.4.2024 the informant came to know that his son was missing for 2-3 days from Ghaziabad and his dead body was recovered along the Eastern Peripheral Expressway, P.S. Dadri on 8.4.2024. He identified the deceased and further alleged in the F.I.R. that Radha, wife of the deceased, was having some extra marital affair with Rajesh Gupta, the present appellant, and he has suspicion that both in a criminal conspiracy have got his son murdered. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation now charge sheet has been submitted against the present appellant and co-accused Smt. Radha. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. Appellant had absolutely no motive to commit the crime. The case of prosecution rests upon circumstantial evidence but the chain of circumstances is not complete in this matter and there is no clinching evidence against the present appellant. He has not been seen with the deceased at any point of time during his missing period. Prosecution has made a false and fabricated story of recovery of incriminating articles on the pointing out of the accused appellant. No robe, chadar, truck or I.D. has been retrieved by the police from the possession of the present appellant and even his voice sample has not been collected by the police and the story of CDR is also a false story. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The appellant is a married person having children. The appellant has no criminal history to his credit. The Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 9.4.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the deceased belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. It is also submitted that the I.O. has collected ample and reliable evidence during investigation regarding the extra marital affair of Smt. Radha with the present appellant. It is true that it is a case based on circumstantial evidence but sufficient evidence has been collected by the I.O. during investigation in respect of complicity of the present appellant in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that on the pointing out of the present appellant the Eicher Canter vehicle has been recovered wherein the murder of the deceased was committed after making him in drunken condition by strangulation with the aid of robe and mobile phone, wallet, bank card, debit card, driving licence, PAN card, aadhar card relating to the deceased were also retrieved by the police. It is also submitted that in the post mortem report cause of the death of the deceased has been found shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries and at the same time some ante mortem injuries on his left eye, face, mouth and neck were also found. Both the chargesheeted accused persons were always in the contact with the mobile and CDR has been collected by the police wherein some conversation in respect of murder of the appellant is found. The offence is very grave and serious. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 8. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court concerned has properly considered the case of the appellant while deciding the bail application. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, and the fact that ample and reliable evidence has been collected by the I.O. regarding extra marital affair of the present appellant with the wife of the deceased, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has not made out a case for bail. The Court concerned passed a reasoned order while rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order does not suffer from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be affirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad