Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1074 of 2018 Appellant :- Jitendra Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dr. C.P. Upadhyay,Anup Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard Dr. C.P. Upadhyay, learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the order dated 20.01.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Maharajganj in Second Bail Application No.1417 of 2017 (Jitendra Yadav Vs. State of U.P.) in Case Crime No. 439 of 2016, under Sections 147, 302, 404, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2) 5 S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Purandarpur, District Maharajganj whereby bail application was rejected.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submitted that this appeal is time barred, hence not maintainable.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that this appeal has been filed against the order dated 20.01.2018 after rejection of second bail application, which is within time.
Perusal of record it appears that this appeal is within time, hence objection raised by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, has no force.
According to prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against seven persons namely Jitendra Yadav, Jalandhar, Daya Shanker, Mulayam Yadav, Deep Narayan Yadav, Sadanand Yadav, Dharmendra Nishad, alleging that on 28.10.2016 they killed Ramkewal Paswan by riding Scorpio Vehicle on him; who received seven injuries and ultimately died.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case; general role has been assigned to all the accused persons; it is not clear that who is the author of the injuries found on the body of the deceased; criminal history of four cases against the appellant, has been explained in para 16 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application; co-accused Jalandhar, Deep Narayan Yadav, Daya Shanker, Dharmendra Nishad and Sadanand, have been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 28.03.2017, 10.04.2017, 19.04.2017 and 12.05.2017, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 10463, of 2017, 12362 of 2017, 8414 of 2017, 12919 of 2017, respectively, copy of which have been filed as annexure no.10 to the affidavit; the appellant is languishing in jail since 05.01.2017 (more than one year three months) in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that criminal history against the appellant are explained properly, and submits that bail application be dismissed.
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 20.01.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant/applicant Jitendra Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case, on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The appellant/applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The appellant/applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The appellant/applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The appellant/applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the appellant/applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which appellant/applicant is suspected.
v) The appellant/applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant 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 :- 27.4.2018/VKG