Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33865 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 671 of 2024 Appellant :- Rajeev Verma Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Bhaskar Bhadra,Girish Kumar Mishra,Krishna Kant Mishra,Vivek Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Counter and supplementary affidavits filed today on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the appellant respectively are 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 Rajeev Verma against the bail rejection order dated 19.10.2023 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST Act, Bareilly in Special Case No. 1868 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 0107 of 2023, under Section 302 I.P.C and under Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Visharatganj, District Bareilly. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA and perused the entire record. 4. The prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. is that on 10.06.2023 at about 6:00 p.m. Lalit Sonkar @ Bobby son of the informant received a phone call and went somewhere by motorcycle after informing the informant that he was going somewhere with Rajeev Verma son of Ram Singh. At about 7:00 pm he informed on phone that he was present at Ramganga bridge. However, after about 15 minutes the informant was informed by phone of his son that his son Lalit Sonkar @ Bobby has met with an accident on Ramganga bridge. When the informant alongwith his family members reached at Ramganga bridge and made a call to his son his mobile was found with the accused-Rajeev Verma who was found in inebriated condition and on the pointing out of the accused-Rajeev Verma the dead body of informant's son was recovered from the water of Ramganga at about 12:00 in the night. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted in this matter. 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. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the accused/appellant has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion and there is absolutely no eye witness of the incident. The F.I.R. has been lodged two days after the incident after due deliberation and whereas the informant as well as police reached the spot immediately after the incident. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact the deceased had a very strained relation with his wife and he often told the village persons to commit suicide. There is no cogent evidence against the appellant. It is also submitted that he is having no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 07.08.2023. The learned trial court in a illegal manner rejected the application for grant of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the present appeal. It has been submitted that the Investigating Officer has concluded the ample evidence against the appellant during investigation. The deceased had himself told his father that he was going to Rajeev Verma the present appellant while leaving his house. It has further submitted that the dead body of the deceased has been retrieved by the police on the pointing out of the appellant. It is also submitted that the evidence of extra judicial confession is also available against the appellant when he confessed his guilt before the informant himself which he has narrated in his subsequent statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. The accused has himself confessed his guilt. The motive which is found on the basis of the evidence on record is that at one occasion the deceased had abused and insulted the appellant in a state of intoxication which caused grudge to the appellant and he decided to do away with him and accordingly on the fateful day he alongwith the deceased took wine and when the deceased inebriated he held down his head in Ramganga and his death caused by drowning. In the postmortem report the cause of death is mentioned asphyxia due to antimortem drowning. The charge- sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer is an authentic document based upon relevant evidence collected during the investigation and the appeal has no force and is liable to be dismissed. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and also taking into account the fact that although it is a case of circumstantial evidence but as per telephone call on the deceased himself at his last time he was in the company of accused/appellant, the recovery of the body of deceased on the pointing out of the accused- appellant, the motive assigned to him and the gravity of offence complicity of accused, no possibility of his false implication at this stage and also considering that most of the issues raised by the learned counsel for the accused/appellant relate to the merits of the case which cannot be met out at this stage and only period of incarceration of the accused/appellant is not sufficient for granting bail to him in the instant case of murder, I do not find any force in the appeal. No illegality, infirmity or perversity has been found in the impugned order dated 19.10.2023. 8. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad