Court No. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5340 of 2017 Applicant :- Ganesh @ Guddu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Ram Shish Ram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri S.K.Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Zafeer Ahmad, leaned AGA appearing for the State.
It is alleged that the applicant had injected two injections on the left pelvis of the minor son of the complainant which caused paralysis on the left leg.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his bail prayer submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that the FIR was lodged on an application moved under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.and that too after a considerable delay of about three months for which no plausible explanation has been given. It is next contended that no independnt witness has been produced by the prosecution to substantiate the prosecution version. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that it is alleged that the applicant carries no medical degree and is running his clinic, who is not authorized to venture into the medical field. In spite of this fact the applicant is practising as a doctor and because of this negligent act of the applicant people at large are suffering. In the present case the complainant had suffered because of the act of the applicant. The applicant carries no previous criminal history and is under detention since 15.12.2016. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. However, considering the deterrent theory of punishment this Court imposes a fine of Rs. 1.00 lac to be deposited with the court concerned before the release of the applicant.
It is made clear that if the said amount of fine is not deposited within a period of one month before the court concerned prior to his release, the court concerned will be at liberty to cancel his bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Ganesh @ Guddu involved in Case Crime No. 69 of 2016, under Sections 326, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Indergarh, District Kannauj be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 IA