Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3975 of 2018 Appellant :- Ganesh Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Sri Vidhu Prakash Pandey, filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State and Sri Vidhu Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant, and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 12.7.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2/Special Judge ( S.C./S.T. Act), Kaushambi in Bail Application No.86 of 2018 ( State vs. Ganesh Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 101 of 2018, under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)5-A and 3(1) Gha of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Saini, District-Kaushambi whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.
According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely Ganesh Singh, Jitendra Singh and Dharmendra Singh alleging that on 27.2.2028 they assaulted Ram Nihorey, husband of the complainant, with kicks, fists and axe. He received thigh injury and one on head and parietal bone was found fractured and other injuries were found simple in nature.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 21.3.2018 (more than five months); having no criminal history; he has been falsely implicated; According to F.I.R., main role has been assigned to co-accused Jitendra Singh; except one injury, all injuries were found simple in nature; according to statement of injured Ram Nihorey, general role has been assigned to all accused; there is no independent witness and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that the appellant has no criminal history.
For the foregoing discussions, 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 appellant has made out a case for bail. The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 12.7.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.
Let appellant Ganesh Singh involved in aforesaid case 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 appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The appellant 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 appellant 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.
Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 OP