Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16981 of 2017 Applicant :- Gajendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anadi Krishna Narayana,Neeharika Sinha Narayana,Pritam Das,Ulajhan Singh Bind Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Daya Shanker Pandey
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 10.8.2016.
Heard Sanju Lata,holding brief of Sri Pritam Das, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhisek Kumar Pandey holding brief of Sri Daya Shanker Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in this case, the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.4.2016 i.e. three and half years. During this period only two witnesses have been adduced from the side of the prosecution. P.W. 1 Gautam Kumar is informant and P.W. 2 is constable Haroon Ali, who is a formal witness, except this no other witnesses have been adduced in this case. The FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged on the basis of an application moved under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. Initially the FIR of the alleged incident was lodged under section 328, 302 IPC and during investigation the case was converted under section 306 IPC. At the time of the alleged incident the deceased was living at the house of her brother (informant). There was matrimonial dispute in between the parties and four cases were also lodged by the deceased against the applicant including the case of maintenance. The FIR of the alleged incident was lodged on the basis of false allegation. The deceased has committed suicide herself. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. Co-accused Mahendra Singh father-in-law of the deceased has already been released on bail by the court below vide order dated 17.10.2016. There is no cogent evidence against the applicant with regard to the abatement.
Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the first bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merit by this court, therefore the present bail application is not maintainable. It has further been submitted that the applicant is husband of the deceased. In first information report it has been mentioned that the deceased was harassed and tortured by her in-laws for demand of dowry but learned counsel has not disputed that there was matrimonial dispute in between the husband and wife. The deceased was residing at the house of the informant. The applicant has committed the alleged offence , therefore the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submission of the learned counsel for the pirates, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Gajendra Singh involved in Case Crime No. 434 of 2015, (S.T. No. 347 of 2016) under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Sector 58 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019/A.