Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117202 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19666 of 2025 Applicant :- Vikki Alias Satish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Vikki Alias Satish, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 107 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station- Echotech-I, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar. 4. As per the prosecution story, on 24.11.2024 at about 2:30 pm, the mother (deceased) of the informant went somewhere. After that, her missing report was lodged on 25.11.2024 at Mangolpuri Thana, Delhi. On 29.11.2024, the informant got information from P.S. Ecotech 1 Greater Noida that her mother's dead body was found at Greater Noida, which was duly identified. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 24.12.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant has surfaced during the course of the investigation. The first informant in her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. disclosed the name of co- accused Navin who is stated to have come to the house of the deceased and taken her away and she did not return and her mobile phone was closed. The witnesses Hemant and Kalicharan have also supported the FIR version and disclosed the name of co-accused Navin. In the Taskara Poochhtachh of Navin the name of the applicant has surfaced. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the only evidence available against the applicant is the confessional statement of the co-accused Navin. Even otherwise the role of only catching hold of the feet of the deceased has been assigned to the applicant and role of causing death has been assigned against co-accused Ankush. Navin has disclosed that the applicant had asked him to bring the deceased from her house. He was on constant talk with the applicant on the mobile. The deceased had accompanied him and he left the deceased with the applicant and thereafter he does not know what happened. Later on, in the statement recorded on 24.11.2024 after his arrest Navin has revealed the name of one Ankush who is stated to be also present along with the deceased in the Ertiga Car being driven by the applicant. The deceased was setting in the front seat while Navin and Ankush were setting in the back seat. Ankush is stated to have strangulated the deceased on the indication of the applicant. Navin is stated to have caught hold of the hands of the deceased while the applicant is stated to have caught hold of the feet of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was later on dumped on the road side. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 6. Per contra, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that the applicant along with the co-accused persons conspired to kill the deceased and also succeeded to do so. There was an agreement to that effect and the applicant it appears had promised each of the co-accused persons Rs. 50,000/- each. No indulgence is warranted and the bail application is liable to be rejected. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, the Court finds that the factum that the applicant along with co- accused persons hatched a criminal conspiracy to kill the deceased by strangulating her cannot be ruled out on the prima facie appraisal of the evidence on record. 8. In such view of the matter, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is accordingly rejected. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Anjali BAIL No. 19666 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad