Supreme Court Grants Bail to Double Murder Accused After Six Years in Prison for Alleged Murder of His Wife and Her Lawyer In 2015

(Judicial Quest News Network)

The Apex Court on Friday granted bail to artist Chintan Upadhyay accused of murdering his wife and her lawyer Haresh Bhambani in 2015.

 A division bench of Justices L Nageshwar Rao and BR Gavai cited slow progress of the trial and the Upadhyay’s incarceration of over six years while granting bail. The Court, However, imposed strict bail conditions, disallowing Upadhyay from living in Mumbai.

The petitioner has been in custody for nearly 6 years. The trial is in progress and 28 witnesses have been examined and 12 witnesses are yet to be examined. The Court said in bail order.

The court has further said that the petitioner shall not make any attempt to influence the witnesses. The petitioner shall also surrender the passport in the Trial Court within a period of one week from today (orders date).

The present SLP is filed against the impugned final judgment and order dated 21.12.2020 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Bail Application No.3615 of 2019, whereby the High Court of Bombay dismissed the bail application of the Petitioner on erroneous grounds.

The Accused/Appellant was arrested on 22.12.2015 in Cr No. 444 of 2015 U/s 302, 396, 201, 109, 120B r/w 34 of IPC on the basis of extra judicial confession dated 15.12.2015 of the mother of main accused Vidyadhar Rajbhar who alleged have been stated to his mother that, he killed Hema at the instance of the Petitioner. The Petitioner is original accused no.4 in Sessions Case No. 136 of 2016 pending before the Hon’ble Court at Dindoshi Mumbai.

The petitioner has been in custody for nearly 6 years. The trial is in progress and 28 witnesses have been examined and 12 witnesses are yet to be examined. Having scrutinized the record and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for bail having been incarcerated for nearly 6 years.

The petitioner shall reside in any place other than Mumbai and shall visit Mumbai only for the purpose of attending the Court.

The Apex Court also put the condition in the bail order that the accused petitioner shall provide the place of his residence to the Trial Court within a period of one week from today.

Senior Advocate Raja Thakre,Dilip Annasaheb Taur (AOR) assisted by Advocate Bharat Manghani,  argued a delay in the trial. They produced a chart showing that trial was delayed due to the adjournments sought by the prosecution, lengthy cross-examination by the co-accused lawyers, and the Court was unavailable on several dates.

 The order came on an appeal file by Upadhyay challenging Bombay high Court’s verdict which junked his bail on the ground that there is incriminating material against the applicant.

Earlier a local court in Mumbai had also rejected the interim bail plea of accused observing that the accused lodged in jails are in a secure situation compared to the daily working people in society who are exposed to the outside social atmosphere.

Hema Upadhyay, a Mumbai based artist had matrimonial dispute with petitioner which was pending since 2010 and in fact it is prima facie apparent that it was deceased Hema Upadhyay the wife of the present Petitioner who was treating the present Petitioner with cruelty and there is a judicial finding to that effect in the order of the family court granting divorce to the Petitioner on the ground of cruelty.

The arrested accused are Shiv Kumar Rajbhar, Pradip Kumar Rajbhar, Vijay Kumar Rajbhar and Azad Rajbhar.

The Bail Condition include

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to the following conditions: –

(a) The petitioner shall reside in any place other than Mumbai and shall visit Mumbai only for the purpose of attending the Court.

(b) The petitioner shall not make any attempt

to influence the witnesses.

(c) The petitioner shall surrender the passport

in the Trial Court within a period of one week from

today.

(d) The petitioner shall provide the place of

his residence to the Trial Court within a period of one

week from today.

(e) The petitioner shall report to the local

police station at the place of his residence on the

first date of every month.