Court No. - 81
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51698 of 2019 Applicant :- Laxman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Manish Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 278 of 2019 under Sections 304 I.P.C., Police Station Shikohabad, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no direct evidence in this case against the applicant and that there is only circumstantial evidence on record against applicant, which is contained in F.I.R. itself. According to F.I.R., accused-applicant along with other two co-accused had taken away deceased i.e. son of the informant on the pretext that they would play Holi and thereafter after getting the deceased drunk, they had left him in unconscious condition beneath the railway bridge, regarding which some unknown person had informed him on phone, whereafter he had gone to the hospital in Shikohabad. From there, deceased was referred to Agra, where he died. It is submitted that person who is said to have informed the informant about the said occurrence, his statement has not been recorded by the I.O.. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made from him. Only on the basis of suspicion, he has been made accused in this case. It is also argued that he had collided with the divider because of which he had received injuries. He has also drawn attention to the post-mortem report in which six injuries are found to have been suffered. The deceased had died ten days after the occurrence. F.I.R. has been lodged after considerable delay on 1.4.2019 while the incident occurred on 21.3.2019 which has not been explained. Applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.6.2019. If he is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer of bail, but has not controverted the aforesaid fact.
In view of above arguments, looking to the fact, taking into consideration the quantum of punishment, nature of offence and period of detention, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Laxman involved in aforesaid crime 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 that:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 A.P. Pandey