Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20968 of 2018 Applicant :- Deewan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Zafar Moonis,Ashwini Kumar Awasthi,Manish Tiwary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amrendra Nath Singh,Sunil Kumar
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
This is the third bail application. The first and second bail application have been rejected on the ground of false affidavit given by the son of the accused Pappu.
Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Utsav Singh, holding brief of Sri Amrendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Deewan Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.840 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 364, 307, 302, 435, 394, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that 11 persons have been named in the FIR and general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. It is argued that three persons have received simple injuries in the alleged incident. It is argued that co-accused Veerendra, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.08.2017 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.8241 of 2017. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Criminal history of the applicant is explained in para 30 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2016. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India & Another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2004, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019 Anand Sri./-