"He Would Have Managed CID Probe If HC Had Not Intervened": Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Former BSP MLA In Murder Case

The Allahabad High Court last week denied bail to former BSP MLA Dr. Vijay Kumar, the prime accused in the Shikhar Srivastava murder case as the Court noted that he is a resourceful person who could evade his arrest for four long years and might have even managed the CID probe if the HC had not intervened. 

Observing that the accused was not allowing the trial to proceed, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh denied him bail after noting that if released on bail, he would be in a position to influence the witnesses and tamper with the evidence.

The case in brief 

As per the allegations in the FIR, Srivastava had allegedly given Rs. 3 lakhs to Kumar and his wife Mradula Anand on their demand as they had promised him (deceased) that he would be given a government job. However, despite the assurances, no government job was ever offered to the deceased.

On January 19, 2015, the deceased went to the House of the accused applicant in Lucknow for a refund of the due amount, however, he did not return. On the very next day, the dead body of the deceased was found lying along the roadside at Badosari, Ramnagar, district-Barabanki.

Initially, the matter was probed by the local police, however, allegedly under the influence of Kumar and other co-accused persons and with the assistance of the then opposition leader, Swami Prasad Maurya, the probe of the matter was transferred from local police to C.B.C.I.D.

However, this order transferring the probe to CBCID was challenged before the High Court in August 2017. The Court quashed the said order and directed the Superintendent of Police, Barabanki to ensure that the investigation of the case was carried out in a fair and proper manner.

The Court had also directed that the police report be submitted to the competent court within six weeks, however, this order was not followed for 2 long years and therefore, a contempt plea was moved in the High Court in 2019 alleging disobedience of the order passed by the Division Bench.

Consequent to this, Kumar and his wife were finally arrested in February 2019, even when non-bailable warrants against him were issued in January 2015 and the proceedings under sections 82 & 83 were initiated against him. 

In his confessional statement, Kumar said that the deceased had illicit relations with his wife and when despite being warned, he did not correct his course, Kumar asked his wife Mradula Anand to call him to their house and when he reached there, he was killed with bricks and stones and his dead body was thrown away.

Court's observations

The Court took into account the confessional statement, statements of the servants of the accused, the alleged recovery of the car used in the murder of the deceased at the instance of the accsued, and other incriminating circumstances to deny him bail.

"Considering the status of the accused-applicant, who was an M.L.A. and contested the election for Lok Sabha and the status of witnesses, who come from the poor background, the prosecution apprehension of influencing the witnesses and tampering with the evidence by the accused-applicant cannot ruled out. The accused applicant could not have been arrested had this court not intervened in the contempt proceedings as he could evade his arrest for four years...The accused are not allowing the trial court to proceed with the trial. The co-accused, Mradula Anand after her bail application got rejected by this court, could get short term bail on medical ground and on one pretext or other, she is not appearing before the trial court so that the trial could not proceed as is evident from the report submitted by the learned trial court," the Court remarked as it rejected the bail plea of the accused.

Case title - Dr. Vijay Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1751 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 372

Click Here To Read/Download Order