Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Jagdish Yadav vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 May, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20244 of 2018 Applicant :- Jagdish Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Vats Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons alleging that on 17.8.2016 he killed Sunil Yadav (husband of complainant) by shot fire. During investigation, applicant confessed before one Baijnath and stated that he killed Sunil Yadav.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. Applicant was admitted to deceased in the hospital for treatment, unfortunately he died. There is no recovery from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness and eye witness account against the applicant. There is no legal evidence against the applicant except extra judicial confession before one Baijnath. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 18.3.2018 (more than two months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
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 applicant has no criminal history. There is no recovery on the pointing out of applicant and there is no evidence against the applicant except extra judicial confession before one Baijnath.
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 opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let applicant Jagdish Yadav involved in Case Crime No.
371 of 2016, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Turkpatti, District Kushi Nagar 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 :- 29.5.2018 A. Singh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Jagdish Yadav vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 May, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Umesh Vats