Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46595 of 2017 Applicant :- Anar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Certified copy of statement of P.W. 2 is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.
This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order of this Court dated 14.1.2016 passed in crl. misc. bail application no. 38797 of 2013.
The second bail application is being pressed on the ground that the accused applicant is in jail since 15.1.2013 and till date only two witnesses have been examined. Further contention of the leaned counsel for the applicant is that there is no directed evidence against the applicant except last seen. He further submitted that P.W. 3 Irshad Ali has already been declared hostile.
The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A. G. A.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.
In view of the above, let the applicant Anar Singh be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 1243 of 2012, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Mainpuri with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
However, it is directed that the aforesaid case crime number pending before the concerned court below be decided expeditiously, as early as possible in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle as has been laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another v. Union of India; 2017 (5) SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018 Manoj