Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20839 of 2018 Applicant :- Layak Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi, Ishwar Chandra Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Rahul Kumar Sharma, Vikas Srivastava
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
On the last occasion learned counsel for the applicant was directed to inform the learned counsel for the informant in writing about the order dated 06.05.2019 in which it was mentioned that the case will be taken up in the first call and will not be adjourned on any ground. Today, learned counsel for the applicant has given a notice in writing to Sri Rahul Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the informant, but he is not present. The said notice is taken on record.
Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Layak Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.25 of 2017, under Sections 307, 302 I.P.C., Police Station Chandpa, District Hathras.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is argued that as per version of FIR, the applicant has been assigned the role of catching hold of the deceased and co-accused Mahesh Kumar, who fired at the injured due to which he died on the spot, has already been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 06.12.2018 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.33438 of 2018. It is argued that the case of the applicant is on better footing than that of co-accused Mahesh Kumar, who has already been granted bail. It is next contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.02.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Anand Sri./-