Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13934 of 2016 Applicant :- Dinesh Pal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi,Santosh Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
This is second bail application. First bail application being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31489 of 2014 was rejected on merits vide order dated 30.3.2015.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated; that after unfortunate rejection of his first bail application vide order dated 30.3.2015, the proceedings of trial against the applicant in S.T. No.846 of 2014, State Vs. Dinesh Pal was held up after recording the statements of P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 at Annexure No.S.A.3; that after rejection of first bail application of applicant, the first informant moved an application under section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning other accused persons named in F.I.R., the family members of applicant, which application was rejected on merits by Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 29.10.2015 (S.A.-1); that against rejection of application under section 319 Cr.P.C., the first informant filed Application U/s 482 No.33711 of 2015 and vide order dated 24.11.2015 passed in above Application U/s 482 No.33711 of 2015 (S.A.2), the further proceedings of S.T. No.846 of 2014, Case Crime No.1981 of 2014, under sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Hardauganj, District Aligarh have been stayed; that in view of above stay order passed in Application U/s 482 No.33711 of 2015 of the first informant, the trial has been held up and there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial; that the applicant has not committed dowry death of his wife and he is in custody since 14.6.2014; that since the applicant has been in custody for a period more than four years, he may kindly be released on bail; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, period of custody over four year as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Dinesh Pal Singh be released on bail in Case Crime No.198 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act P.S. Harduaganj, District Aligarh on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the 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 he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant 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 the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 31.8.2018 Tamang