‘He Was Actively Involved In The Kanpur Bikru Massacre’: Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Assisting Slain Gangster Vikas Dubey

The Allahabad High Court recently rejected the bail application filed by Jai Kant Bajpai alias Jai involved in the 2020 Kanpur Bikru Encounter, in which eight policemen were brutally murdered and seven other police personnel received grievous injuries at the hands of a gang of people led by slain gangster Vikas Dubey. The bench of Justice Mayank Kumar Jain observed that Bajpai was actively involved in the incident and he actually assisted Dubey by providing him with Rs. 2 lakh and 25 cartridges to be used in the incident and further, provided vehicles to him to enable him to escape after committing one of the most heinous crimes. The case against Bajpai As per the prosecution's case, on the night of July 2, 2021, the Police officials, in strong numbers, had gone to arrest Vikas Dubey, a dreaded gangster, however, somehow, Vikas got the information that policemen were coming to arrest him and thus, he laid in wait, along with his henchmen, for the Police to arrive. Vikas's associates, which included his relatives, had positioned themselves at strategic points, atop the roof of his house and as soon as policemen reached there, they opened indiscriminate fire on them, which led to eight police personnel being shot dead and another nine sustaining grievous gunshot injuries. During the course of the investigation, on the basis of the statement of the main accused Vikas Dubey, it was revealed that the applicant-accused (Bajpai) was present in a meeting with Vikas Dubey and other accused persons on the evening of July 2, 2020, to carve out a plan to commit the murder of police persons who were scheduled to approach the slain leader Vikas Dubey to arrest him. It was further found in the probe that the applicant provided money and ammunition to the Dubey and after that, he provided safe passage to him to perform the journey. Consequently, he was booked under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 353, 333, 307, 302, 396, 412, 120-B, 34, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act. He moved the instant application seeking bail in the case. Arguments put forth Before the Court, his counsel argued that the applicant had been made accused in the present case only on the basis of his confessional statement and the statement of co-accused Prashant Shukla, Vikas Dubey and Vipul Dubey was made before the police, therefore, they are not admissible evidence. It was further contended by him that he was not physically present at the place where the incident took place. Instead, he was at an engagement party in a hotel in Kanpur and when he came to know about the incident through TV and other sources, he himself called the police. It was also submitted that he also provided the video footage of the party to the police and that he had met Vikas Dubey only once or twice at parties and apart from this, he had no relation with him. Lastly, it was argued that there is no evidence available on record that Bajpai entered into a conspiracy or provided any assistance to Dubey. On the other hand, Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal, appearing for the state government, opposed the bail plea by reiterating the allegations against him. It is further contended that the applicant is a habitual offender. After the investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed against him. It was also submitted that Bajpai is a hardened criminal and there is every likelihood that if he is enlarged on bail, he may indulge in the commission of the crime and shall make his best efforts to pressurize the witnesses to depose in his favour. Lastly, it was submitted that the statement of the main accused Vikas Dubey against the accused Bajpai is a statement of a dead person who cannot be found to give evidence and therefore, his statement is to be considered against him under Section 32 (3) of the Evidence Act, 1872. High Court’s observations At the outset, the Court noted that as per Section 32 of the Evidence Act, it is clear that the statement made by a dead person is legally recognized and can be used in evidence even though it does not relate to the cause of his death. In this regard, the Court perused the statements of Dubey to note that the statement made by Dubey against Bajpai will be considered prima facie to indicate his involvement in the Bikru massacre. Further, the Court took note of the statements of other co-accused against Bajpai to observe thus: “On the basis of the aforesaid statements, prima facie it transpires that the present applicant was well known and was a trusted person of Vikas Dubey. The main accused Vikas Dubey invited him along with the other accused to attend a meeting in the evening of 02.07.2020 for committing conspiracy and to further plan to commit the incident known as Vikroo massacre. During this meeting, the present applicant provided money amounting to Rs. 2 lakh and 25 cartridges to the main...

‘He Was Actively Involved In The Kanpur Bikru Massacre’: Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Assisting Slain Gangster Vikas Dubey

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags