Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36839 of 2021 Applicant :- Atar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh,Syed Imran Ibrahim,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Ranjan Tripathi,Hemant Kumar,Pradeep Kumar Keshri,Sangam Lal Kesharwani
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Counter affidavit has been filed by learned counsel for complainant and the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Manish Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Kumar Keshri, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 352 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307, 34 of I.P.C. and Section 27/30 of Arms Act, registered at P.S.- Bhelupur, District- Varanasi.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant has not committed the alleged offence. No such incident as alleged in the F.I.R. has ever been taken place. F.I.R. was lodged in connivance with police officers. Further submitted that there is cross version of the present case and at this stage it cannot be determined as to which party was aggressor. There is no independent witness in the present case. The allegations levelled against the applicant are fully false and baseless and case under aforementioned Sections is not made out against him. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.07.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for complainant submitted that the applicant fired upon the injured and the bullet hit the shoulder of injured.
Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of the accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.
Perusal of record reveals that the injured Abhishek and witnesses have admitted in their statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that they also took action in their self defence, thus prima-facie, it is evident that there is cross version.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that there is cross version and at this stage, it cannot be ascertained as to which party was aggressor, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Atar Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
2. The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.
3. During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 21.12.2021 VPS