Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14172 of 2019 Applicant :- Jitendra @ Jeetu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Pal
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. of the alleged incident was lodged by Rajveer Singh, the father of the deceased, on 3.12.2018 alleging therein that on 26.11.2018 at about 5.00 p.m. his son Lavkesh went for Kasba Mai ( a place ). When his son did not return, he has also lodged Gumshudgi report on 30.11.2018 at police station Sadabad District Hathras. Thereafter on 2.12.2018 by way of news published in a newspaper with regard to an unknown dead body. He reached the police station concerned and identified his son by his clothes. The F.I.R. was lodged against unknown. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. The informant Rajveer Singh in his first statement has also not disclosed the name of the applicant. Thereafter, in his second statement he has stated that Yashpal and Sukhvir told him that they have seen the deceased with applicant and other co-accused Anil and Hariom. The second statement of informant was recorded on 22.12.2018 after about one month and on the same day the statement of Yashpal and Sukhvir was also recorded in which they have stated that they have seen the deceased along with applicant and other co-accused. In the statement of Yashpal and Sukhvir it has come that the applicant was saying that the deceased has established illicit relationship with his wife and he was blackmailing to her due to which he committed murder of the deceased with the help of other co-accused. It has been further submitted that in fact there was no illicit relation in between the wife of the applicant and the deceased. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. Except the evidence of last seen there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion. Nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 6.1.2019.
Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that there was illicit relation in between the wife of the applicant and deceased. In the statement of witnesses it has come that the deceased was blackmailing to the wife of applicant due to which the applicant and other co-accused committed murder of the deceased. Yashpal and Sukhvir are witnesses of last seen. They have seen the deceased in the company of the applicant and other co-accused. The applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Jitendra @ Jeetu involved in Case Crime No. 625 of 2018, under Section 302, 201 IPC Police Station Baldev District Mathura 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;
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and he will cooperate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 25.4.2019 Gss