Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22693 of 2019 Applicant :- Kanhai Singh @ Kanhaiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Geetam Singh,Pooja Chaudhary,S2451 Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
List has been revised. Sri Jitendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant is not present, even though the case has been listed peremptorily. Even on the earlier occasion also he has send illness slip.
Looking to the aforesaid facts, that the case has been listed peremptorily, and the list has been revised, the Court proceed to hear the case on merits.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record.
This bail application moved on behalf of applicant praying to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.268 of 2019, under Sections 365, 302, 201, 34, IPC, Police Station Kotwali Farrukhabad, District Farrukhabad.
I have perused the FIR as well as the order by means of which the bail application moved on behalf of the applicant has been rejected.
Contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicants is that both the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case; that the applicant was not named in the FIR and the FIR has been lodged against unknown persons; that subsequently after 14 days of the alleged incident, on the basis of some information received from police informer, the applicant was arrested on the basis of confessional statement; that it is categorical stated that there is no evidence of any shot against applicant neither any recovery has been made from the applicant; that the criminal history of the applicant have been explained in paragraph no.16 of the writ petition, which has been perused by the Court. The further contention is that the applicant is in jail since 06.04.2019.
Learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the bail application with the contention that the applicant had a motive to commit the alleged crime, however, he does not disputed the fact that even the evidence of last seen had come after 14 days of the alleged incident, and that too on the basis of a police informer.
Keeping in view the reasons as stated above, the facts and circumstances of the case as have been discussed at the Bar of this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view of this Court will not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant Kanhai Singh @ Kanhaiya involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The 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 default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 VKG