Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Aditya vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4318 of 2019 Applicant :- Aditya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hemendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated on the basis of suspicion; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Priyanka, she was living with Madhu @ Puja deceased in a rented accommodation and applicant and co-accused persons used to come to Puja and she used to take liquor with them daily and on 21.8.2018 when she had gone Najibabad to the place of her brother, talked with Puja deceased on mobile in the night of 22.8.2018 at about 10:30 p.m. when she told that she is at home with applicant and named accused-persons and on 23.8.2018 when she returned back to her residence found main door unlocked and Puja lying dead in bed with blood on her neck; that after a period of two days of lodging of F.I.R., on 25.8.2018 statements of Jai Singh and Arvind were recorded to the effect that on 23.8.2018 applicant by mobile phone called Jai Singh at bye pass near Krishna College and when he along with Arvind reached there, applicant with Subham asked him to drop them near Judges Chowk and also disclosed that in the night at about 3-4:00 a.m. he has murdered Puja; that applicant never called Jai Singh at above place and was never dropped by him or his associate Arvind at Judges Chowk or at any other place and never made any extra judicial confession of the offence before them; that recovery of knife from applicant from grass on an open plot in public place on 12.9.2018 after a period of about 15 days has been falsely planted, of which there is no independent witness; that named accused Navneet and Masoom have been exonerated upon investigation and charge sheet was filed against named accused-applicant and one Subham; that Subham has declared juvenile and has been granted bail; that there is no eye witness of the incident; that deceased was a girl of criminal antecedents involved in cases of dacoity with murder as well as under Gangster Act and had also lodged F.I.R. under section 376 IPC against Liyaqat and others as mentioned in paras 17 & 18 of affidavit; that deceased appears to have been murdered by some unknown persons; that applicant neither provided liquor to deceased nor had any motive to cause her death nor caused any fatal injuries to her; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 5.9.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Aditya be released on bail in Case Crime No.816 of 2018, under Sections 302 IPC, P.S. Kotwali City, District Bijnor on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 Tamang
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Aditya vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 January, 2019
Judges
  • Harsh Kumar
Advocates
  • Hemendra Kumar