Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8796 of 2019 Applicant :- Bakil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vipul Shukla,Radhey Shyam Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ladlee Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against ten accused persons, namely, Vahid, Jafar, Aslam, Kaley, Raju, Bachchu, Jauhar Ali, Vakil, Yamin Khan and Ali Hasan alleging that on 14.6.2018 they assaulted Ramjan, Ahmad and Kalim due to previous enmity by shot fire. Ramjan received five injuries and died. Country made pistols were recovered from the possession of Vahid and Jafar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused Kale and Aslam have already been enlarged on bail by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 22.2.2019 and 13.2.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 3691 of 2019 and 56734 of 2019 and the case of the applicant is not grievous than the case of co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail, hence the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.6.2018 (more than eight months) having no criminal history. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There was no motive or intention to kill the deceased. General allegation is made against the applicant. There is no eye witness account against the applicant. There is no independent witness against the applicant and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and also admitted that the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused Kale and Aslam, who have already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, 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 opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Bakil involved in Case Crime No.344 of 2018, under Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 506 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act, Police Station-Kanth, District-Shahjahanpur 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 applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant 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 applicant 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.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 OP