Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23097 of 2019 Applicant :- Arjesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Vakalatnama, filed today, by Sri Satish Kumar Shukla, on behalf of the informant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned private counsel, appearing on behalf of the informant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
By means of this application, the accused-applicant, Arjesh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 08 of 2019, under Sections-436, 429, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Sikandarpur Vaishya, District-Kasganj, is seeking enlargement on bail.
Learned counsel for accused-applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number, which was got lodged on 19.1.2019 at 12.49 PM whereas occurrence was said to have occurred at 10.00 PM on 18.1.2019; it was a delayed report by Chandrapal, who was not an eye witness, rather it was Anil Kumar and Jai Singh, who claimed to have seen the accused, while they were running from the spot after setting Chappar at fire in which three buffaloes have been said to have burnt alive; accused- applicant is of no criminal antecedents nor is of any concern with above occurrence. There is no likelihood of accused-applicant fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence. Hence bail has been prayed for.
Sri Satish Kumar Shukla, learned private counsel, appearing for informant as well as Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail with this contention that three buffaloes were burnt alive in this very offence. Offience is very serious, hence, bail application be rejected.
Perusal of the first information report reveals that the first informant was not eye witness account, rather report was lodged upon contention of Anil Kumar and Jai Singh that the present accused-applicant, Arjesh, and Manoj set the Chappar at fire whereas Jai Singh, in his statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has categorically said that he has seen Arjesh, while putting Chappar at ablaze. Manoj was not there and his name was wrongly written in the report because of enmity regarding one plot in between the informant and Manoj. First information report has been said to be incorrect by the above witness.
Under all above facts and circumstances and considering the rival submissions, nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, this bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Arjesh, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.
In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019 bgs/