Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18373 of 2018 Applicant :- Krishna Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Srivastava,Gaurav Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Gaurav Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Nitish Kumar Shukla, his driver Devnath was returning tractor trolly towards village Saltauwa from village Umra along with Vishal and Munna Pal was also coming by another tractor and on way a motorcyclist came forward from behind and abused Munna Pal for driving against rules and threatened him and when they reached near Bharvalia at about 7:00 p.m., three persons came by blue-white Hero I Smart motorcycle, who were identified by Vishal and Munna Pal and after stopping the tractor fired at his driver Devnath and fled away; that applicant is alleged to have been apprehended in the next morning on 16.12.2017 with recovery of a country made pistol from him and recovery of Hero I Smart motorcycle and his confessional statement was recorded in police custody, which is not admissible in evidence; that subsequently statements of alleged eye witnesses Munna Pal and Vishal Pal were recorded to the effect that Krishna Yadav along with Vinod Chaudhary and Ramesh Chaudhary came at the spot and Krishna Yadav fired at Devnath; that if Munna Pal and Vishal Pal had identified the real culprits, there was no reason for not mentioning their names in the F.I.R.; that applicant has been falsely implicated, showing false recovery from him, of which there is no independent witness; that applicant had no motive to cause death of Devnath and did not commit the offence in question; that applicant has no previous criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 17.12.2017.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicant Krishna Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No.1298 of 2017 under Sections 302 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Walterganj, District Basti on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Tamang