Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Srinivas Verma, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 24.7.2019 against seven accused persons alleging that father of complainant was missing from 21.6.2019 and missing report was lodged on 24.6.2019. During investigation, Sahab Ram was arrested by the police, he confessed the offence and stated that Aditya Tiwari killed the deceased by strangulation with the help of Ram Pal by taking supari rupees two lacs to Abhimanyu, Ravindra and Ram Subhash because Roshan Khan (son of deceased) were solemnized love marriage with sister of Ram Subhash. D.L., gamchha, spectacle and slipper of deceased were recovered at the pointing out of Sahab Ram. Dead body was not recovered till date. During investigation, names of named accused persons were exonerated.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused namely Ravindra Rajbhar has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.11.2019 in Bail No. 11048 of 201, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The role of the applicant was hatching conspiracy. There are general allegations against the applicant. Main role of assault was assigned to co-accused Aditya Tiwari and D.L., gamchha, spectacle and slipper of deceased were recovered at the pointing out of Sahab Ram. The role of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Aditya Tiwari and Sahab Ram. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 11.9.2019 (more than two and half months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and the case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Ravindra Rajbhar who has been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let applicant Abhimanyu Rajbhar involved in Case Crime No. 158 of 2019, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sammanpur, District Ambedkar Nagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5.The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 A. Singh