Court No. - 40
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46667 of 2018 Applicant :- Deepak Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Giri,Rajendra Prasad Mishra,Surendra Kumar AND Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45741 of 2017 Applicant :- Shri Ram Pathak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Dubey,Sanjay Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Prasad Mishra,Surendra Kumar AND Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34713 of 2018 Applicant :- Tuntun Sharma @ Vishawapti Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram (Rawat),Archana Kumari,Indra Deo Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Prasad Mishra,Surendra Kumar
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
All the three bail applications are second bail applications of applicants after rejection of their first bail applications vide order dated 26.8.2016, copy at Annexure-1.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.45741 of 2017, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Rai, learned counsel for applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46667 of 2018, Sri Vishnu Shankar Choubey and Sanjay Kumar Rai, learned counsel for applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.45741 of 2017, Ms. Archana Kumari and Sri Nagendra Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.34713 of 2018, Sri S.K. Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri R.P. Mishra, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicants contend that applicants have been falsely implicated on the basis of recovery of a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from applicant Deepak Tiwari, Rs.50,000/- from applicant Shri Ram Pathak on 24.9.2014 at the time of their arrest when a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- was also recovered from Shailendra Dubey, Rs.3,00,000/- from Rishi Dubey and Rs.3,10,000/- from Danish; that a recovery of Rs.1,00,000/- is alleged to have been made from applicant Tuntun Sharma @ Vishawapti Sharma on 29.12.2014; that applicants neither kidnapped victim nor realized any ransom amount from wife or brother of kidnapped person; that since Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.20208 of 2015 of co-accused Danish with similar facts, was rejected vide order dated 10.6.2015 so Ist bail applications of applicants were also rejected; that after rejection of bail applications of applicants, co-accused Danish has been granted bail vide order dated 7.1.2019 passed by Bench of Chief Justice in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.25049 of 2016, copy produced for perusal which is taken on record; that applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity with Danish from whom much greater amount of Rs.3,10,000/- was recovered, while a sum of Rs.50,000/-, Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.1,50,000/- were allegedly recovered from applicants; that above recovery is false and inadmissible; that applicants have no criminal history; that applicants undertake that they will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicants are in custody since last more than 4 years and trial has not concluded as yet.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant vehemently opposed prayer of bail and contended that trial is in progress and if the applicants are released on bail, they will misuse the liberty of bail. However, they could not dispute grant of bail to co-accused Danish with identical role.
Upon hearing learned counsel for parties, perusal of record and considering complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on merits of case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicants Deepak Tiwari, Shri Ram Pathak & Tuntun Sharma @ Vishawapti Sharma be released on bail in Case Crime No.397 of 2014, under Sections 364-A. 328, 201/34 I.P.C., P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in like amount to satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicants will co-operate with trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that they are abusing liberty of bail enabling court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not delay disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel bail and send applicants to prison.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019 Kpy