Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31936 of 2015 Applicant :- Jai Prakash @ Rudal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.S. Satyarthi,Hemant Kumar Singh,Jai Shanker Malviya,Shivam Yadav,Vijay Bahadur Shivhare Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Raghuraj Singh Kushwaha
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No.61 of 2015, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 504, 506, 452, 392, 304, 308 IPC, Police Station-
Didarganj, District-Azamgarh and is in jail since 5.6.2015, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the prosecution version spelt out in the F.I.R. of this case which was lodged by Sahab Ram Yadav son of late Balai Yadav, there was a dispute between the informant and late Kanahai Lal Yadav with regard to a piece of land situated in Rajapur (Hubbiganj), Azadpur. On 1.5.2015 at 5.30 Kanhailal, Jaiprakash alias Rudal, Mohd. Salim, Chotu, entered into the Jan Seva Kendra established by the informant and the general merchant shop of Ram Yadav, informant's brother and started abusing and plundering their property and when the informant Ram Ujageer, Himansu and Munnilal Yadav objected, they started quarrelling with them also. In the mean time Om Prakash, Siraj, Kamaludeen, Bhirgu Brijesh, Arvind, Arjun, Vivek, Ram Sevak and Shahid also entered into the shop of the informant and Kanhaiya Lal Yadav and Jai Prakash alias Rudal dealt lathi blows on the head of Munni Lal due to which he received serious head injury and when Ram Ujagir and Himanshu intervened they were also beaten and they had threatening with dire consequences the victim or any one else who dared to lodge FIR. It is next submitted that the injured Munni Lal was taken to Community Health Centre, Foolpur Azamgarh from where the injured was referred to Sadar Hospital where his injuries were examined on 1.5.2015 and from there he was referred to Vedanta Hospital where he died on 9.5.2015. The postmortem of the dead body was performed on 9.5.2015 and his post mortem report was also prepared on the same day, copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure-2. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the role of causing lathi blow to the deceased has specifically been assigned to applicant and co-accused Kanhaiya Lal but the injury report of the deceased dated 1.5.2015 annexed as Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit, shows that he had received only one lacerated wound on his skull. It is obvious that the stitched wound found on the face of the deceased during the post mortem was result of the surgery performed on the skull of the deceased in the Vedanta Hospital during treatment of his skull injury. Hence the prosecution version that both Kanhiya Lal and the applicant had dealt two lathi blows to the deceased stands falsified. The identity of the person who is the author of the solitary skull injury found on the deceased dead body is uncertain. He lastly submitted that the applicant who has no criminal antecedent to his credit is in jail since 5.6.2015, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and Sri Raghuraj Singh Kushwaha have vehemently.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail.
In view of the above, let the applicant, Jai Prakash alias Rudal be released on bail in Case Crime No. 61 of 2015, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 504, 506, 452, 392, 304 and 308 IPC, Police Station-Didarganj, district-Azamgarh on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in with the following conditions:-
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by his;
(b) 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.
Order Date :- 26.4.2018 Manish Tripathi