Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10478 of 2018 Applicant :- Firoj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajmani Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against three unknown persons alleging that on 22.4.2016 they robbed the jewellery shop of Jitendra Verma and shot at his head. He died resultantly. Subsequently, Shiv Kumar, Deepak Ram and Durgesh were arrested and one kg. of silver was recovered from Deepak Ram. Accused Deepak Ram disclosed names of Arvind, Janardan and Firoz stating that they were also indulged in the crime.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Deepak and Arvind who have already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 15.2.2017 & 19.9.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 40054 of 2016 & 31435 of 2017 and the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity(Bail orders are annexed as annexure 5 to the bail application). The applicant is not named in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 6.10.2017(more than six months). Criminal history of four cases has been explained. There is no recovery from this accused. His name has been surfaced in the confessional statement of Deepak Ram. There is no legal evidence against this accused. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that case of applicant is identical to co-accused Deepak Ram and Arvind Yadav who have been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, 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 applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Firoz involved in Case Crime No.0048 of 2016, under Section 394, 302, 411 IPC, Police Station Tarwan, District Azamgarh 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 applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant 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 applicant 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 :- 30.4.2018 P.P.