Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16647 of 2019 Applicant :- Bhanu Pratap @ Pradhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.L. Varma,Chandra Bhushan Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
This bail application has been filed by Bhanu Pratap @ Pradhan, for bail in Case Crime No. 190/2018 under Section 304 I.P.C, P.S. Paraur, District Shahjahanpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that there is no independent witness of the occurrence and as per FIR the deceased had gone for natural call at about 12:30 A.M., the incident was taken place in mid night and when he did not come back, the informant and his mother went to search him and they saw that the applicant was assaulting the deceased by 'bhala'. Learned counsel further submits that according to post-mortem report no injury caused by 'bhala' was found on the body of the deceased and after the post-mortem report the informant changed his version as stated in FIR and stated in his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., that applicant has caused injury to the deceased by 'Danda'. Learned counsel further submits that there are huge contradictions in the contents of FIR and statement of informant recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a law abiding person is in jail since 23.12.2018. If he be released on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
From perusal of the record it transpires that after post-mortem report the version of FIR and statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., of the informant is totally changed.
Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and gravity of the offence, material available on record regarding role of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed. Hence this bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Bhanu Pratap @ Pradhan, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (one should be of his family members/nearest relative) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge, (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and (iv) argument/judgement. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 S.K.