Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4016 of 2021 Applicant :- Bhanu Pratap Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hemendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Vikram Singh
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It was stated that first information report was lodged against six persons but applicant was not named. It was stated that after one and a half year of incident, supplementary statement of complainant was recorded, wherein for the first time the name of applicant has been figured and informant has expressed her suspicion that applicant and co-accused persons including Sani @ Sunil Kumar and Yogesh were involved in the incident. It has been argued that alleged occurrence took place on 28.06.2017 and that applicant was not named in initial statement of informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It has been pointed out that the second statement of informant was recorded on 31.08.2017 wherein she has expressed suspicion that applicant and co-accused Yatendra Singh Thakur, Gandharv and Yogesh were involved and she has given clean chit to the persons, who were named in the first information report. There is no eye-witness of alleged incident and there is no any other evidence against the applicant. No recovery of any incriminating article has been effected from the applicant. It has been submitted that similarly placed co-accused Yatendra Singh Thakur, Sani @ Sunil Kumar and Yogesh have already been granted bail vide order dated 02.07.2021, 28.07.2021, 22.07.2021, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4591 of 2021, 15815 of 2021 and 15313 of 2021. It has been further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.11.2020 and criminal history of one case shown against the applicant has been duly explained and in that case, police have submitted Final Report. It was submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that involvement of applicant was found during investigation. However, it has not been disputed that similarly placed co-accused persons have already been granted bail.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Bhanu Pratap involved in Case Crime No. 385 of 2017, under Sections 302, 120B IPC, P.S. Sikandra Rao, District Hathras, be released on bail on furnishing each 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 shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant shall 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 them 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 condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 A. Tripathi