Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43833 of 2015 Applicant :- Ikram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Yadav,Abhilasha Singh,Deepak Kumar Yadav,Hemendra Pratap Singh,M.P.S. Chauhan,Mohd.
Arshad,Nazrul Islam Jafri,Shyam Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard N.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.K. Tiwari, counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 32 of 2015, u/s 364, 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Delhi Gate, District Aligarh with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.
Prosecution version in brief is that a missing report was given at the concerned police station of eight years old son of the first informant, who was missing since 15.1.2015; the said missing report was taken down in G.D. no. 37 on 6.1.2015 at 3.05 pm. Thereafter, dead body of the child was recovered on 16.1.2015 from NALA in a plastic bag; it is argued that initially suspicion was laid by the first informant and other witnesses on Javid, Asif and Abid but later on an application was made by the first informant on 14.2.2015 alleging that his eight years minor son was murdered by the applicant and his son Asif, subsequently, two witnesses of last seen were introduced on 27.2.2015 namely Fakir Mohd. and Nawab, who stated that they have seen the applicant and his son along with deceased. It is argued both the witnesses are got up witness; he further submitted that alleged recovery of knife shown at the pointing out of the applicant had no blood stains on it as discernible from the recovery memo annexed as annexure-10 to the application. It is argued that evidence of last seen was also introduced after great delay; there is no reliable evidence to connect the applicant with the present crime. Learned counsel candidly stated that bail application of son of the applicant namely Asif was rejected by coordinate Bench of this Court on 24.5.2017 stating that it is well settled that there is no parity with the rejection of co-accused. It is further argued that the applicant is in jail since 5.3.2015. Leaned counsel has stated at the bar that only one prosecution witness PW-1 has been examined and the trial is moving at snail's pace, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that bail of the co-accused Asif has been rejected by this Court in Bail Application no. 20231 of 2015 vide order dated 24.5.2017 and he further submitted that case of the applicant stands on much higher pedestal inasmuch as recovery of knife used in the commission of crime has been made from the possession of the applicant. However he could not effectively refute the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant Ikram involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 21.1.2019 Dhirendra/