Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1132 of 2019 Applicant :- Kripa Shanker Harijan Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Srivastava,Ali Hasan,Istiyaq Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14299 of 2017 was rejected by Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi, J. vide order dated 06.06.2017.
This is second bail application on behalf of the applicant Kripa Shanker Harijan in connection with Session Trial No.139 of 2017 (State Vs. Naveen Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.944 of 2016, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., Police Station Badlapur, district Jaunpur.
The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against three named persons including the applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that Prashant Kumar and the complainant's daughter was having love affair. It was alleged that in the intervening night of 14/15.12.2016 Prashant Kumar has enticed away the daughter of the complainant. It was also alleged that on 20.12.2016 at about 3.00 p.m. the dead body of Prashant Kumar and the complainant's daughter were found near the shop of Prashant.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the new ground is that co-accused Naveen Singh has been admitted to the concession of bail by another Bench of this Court by order dated 24.03.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13785 of 2017, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.125 of the supplementary affidavit and role assigned to the applicant is similar to role of the other co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. He further submitted that the trial has not yet been concluded. He claims parity. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.12.2016, hence he is entitled to be released on bail and he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 and also the fact that aforesaid co-accused has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Kripa Shanker Harijan involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on 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;
v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 R./