Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47814 of 2018 Applicant :- Anil Bhati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Singh (Bohra),Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, Sr.Adv.
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Dheeraj Singh (Bohra), learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is not named in FIR regarding murder of Mintu and injuries to Nagendra on 12.07.2017 in the report lodged by their friend Manoj Kumar; that according to averments made in FIR, first informant as well as victims were returning to Ghaziabad after attending the criminal case before Ghaziabad Courts and at about 02:15 p.m. three motorcycles chased their Scorpio and named accused persons with two unknown persons made indiscriminate firing resulting in death of Mintu and grievous injuries to Nagendra; that name of applicant comes in disclosure statement of one Naresh Tevatia who in his additional statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded on 16.12.2017 stated that he works for applicant Anil Bhati and upon being hired by him, he along with co-accused persons made indiscriminate firing on Mintu and Nagendra and caused multiple injuries to them, resulting in death of Mintu; that according to statement of Naresh Tevatia, he is hired shooter having been hired by applicant; that statement of Naresh Tevatia is not binding on applicant; that applicant never hired Naresh Tevatia for causing death of Mintu or causing injuries to Nagendra; that applicant had no motive to commit the incident through hired shooter or otherwise; that applicant is not a previous convict, and has explained his criminal history in paras 22 to 24 given in support of affidavit; that case of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Naresh Tevatia and other shooters; that applicant has not been assigned with the role of participate in the incident in question, and he has been falsely implicated for criminal conspiracy with co-accused persons with the help of Section 120B IPC; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 27.03.2017.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail and contended that this is a broad daylight murder and pre-planned manner, and applicant was involved in hatching the criminal conspiracy.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, 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 Anil Bhati be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1003 of 2017 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 427 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Indrapuram District Gautam Buddh Nagar 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 :- 20.12.2018 M. ARIF