Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA appearing on behalf of State & perused the record.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case due to ulterior motive. . The first information report with respect to the incident dated 25.4.2010 was lodged on 26.4.2010 against unknown persons with respect to the theft of motor cycles. The stolen motor cycle is alleged to have been recovered from the joint possession of the applicant ad co-accused . There is great inconsistency in the prosecution version. There is no public witness to support the prosecution story. On the other hand learned AGA contended that the applicant and the co-accused have committed offence of theft of motor cycle which has become a curse for the society therefore, the appilcant may not be granted any indulgence of bail. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is absolutely innocent and is languishing in jail since 26.4.2010 . The applicant is not a previous convict. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the aforesaid submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is directed that the applicant Divyanshu Bajpai involved in Case Crime No. 607 of 2010 under section 379 IPC Police Station Sadar Bazar District Shahjahanpur be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond & two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with following conditions:-
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. In case of breach of any condition, the prosecution would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 16.6.2010 Naim