Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3001 of 2018 Appellant :- Chotu Yadav Alias Okesh Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Noor Muhammad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajeev Malviya
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Rajeev Malviya, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 17.04.2018 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Firozabad in Bail Application No. 1114 of 2018 (Chotu Yadav Alias Okesh Yadav vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 124 of 2018, under Section 302, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station Shikohabad, District Firozabad, whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.
As per the prosecution case, appellant had taken the deceased from his house, thereafter, the deceased was dropped back in intoxicated state, he was having injuries on the body, subsequently, deceased succumbed to the injuries; postmortem examination report shows abrasion and contusion on the shoulders; cause of death was not determined; viscera report filed along with counter affidavit shows presence of ethyl alcohol.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that evidence against the appellant is of last seen; there is no other evidence to link the appellant with the commission of the alleged offence; viscera report does not support the prosecution case of poisoning; deceased appears to have succumbed to excessive consumption of alcohol; appellant is languishing in jail since 02.04.2018 having no criminal history and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not abscond or tamper the evidence.
Learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail.
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 17.04.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.
Let appellant Chotu Yadav Alias Okesh Yadav, 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.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018 K.K. Maurya