Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4123 of 2018 Appellant :- Avneesh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Devendra Saini Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shakil Ahmad
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State, Sri Shakil Ahmad, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 03.7.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Bijnor in Bail Application No. 1367 of 2018 (State Vs. Avneesh) arising out of Case Crime No. 356 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 308, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kotwali City, District-Bijnor whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.
According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely Ankit, Avnish, Ravindar, Khilendar and one unknown person alleging that on 6.4.2018 they assaulted by lathies, danda and tabal to Surendra, Pinku, Rajpal and Madan. Except one injury, incised wound on head, all the injuries were found simple in nature.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 3.5.2018 (more than three months); having no criminal history; he has been falsely implicated; except one injury, all injuries of injured were found simple in nature; there is a cross case being crime no. 534 of 2018, including 307 I.P.C. and the present appellant-Ravindra has also received injuries; general role has been assigned to all accused; it is not clear that who is the author of that injuries; at this stage it is not possible to decide who is the aggressor; there is no independent witness and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that the appellant has no criminal history.
For the foregoing discussions, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.
The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 03.7.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.
Let appellant Avneesh involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
1. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.
Order Date :- 27.8.2018 Puspendra