Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37834 of 2017 Applicant :- Brijendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kakkar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Narendra Kumar
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed today by private opposite party is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sailendra Verma holding brief of Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely, Chhotu Khatik, Mukesh Ahirwar, Vikki Balmiki, Brijendra Balmiki, Rahul Ahariwar and one unknown persons; alleging that on 10.7.2017 they shot fire at the injured Ankit Batham, he received injury on his chest and neck and specific role has been assigned against co-accused Mukesh Ahirwar and Vikki Balmiki. In the statement of the injured, the role of firing is assigned to four accused persons namely, Chhotu Khatik, Mukesh Ahirwar, Bikki Balmiki and Brijendra Balmiki and in the statement of the complainant, Chhotu Balmiki has shot fire at the injured.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicant. According to F.I.R. on the statement of the complainant, the role of the applicant is catching hold only. According to statement of the injured, it is not clear who was the author of said injury. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. Injuries found on the body of the injured are not dangerous to life. He is languishing in jail since 15.7.2017 (more than six months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as 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.
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 Brijendra involved in Case Crime No. 302 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi 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 :- 28.2.2018 A. Singh