Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17249 of 2019 Applicant :- Mahesh Richhariya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Khan,Javed Husain Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initially final report was submitted and vide order dated 19.3.2018 Premnarayan Khatik, Ashraf Khan, Dhrubal Rajput, Mahesh Richhariya, Khalik and Suspendra were summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused Ravindra Rajput and Brijkishore Rajput, Pappu @ Shiv Kant and Dharmendra have been enlarged on bail by co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.2.2013 and 4.12.2012 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 4590 of 2013 and 31153 of 2012 and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused, who have been enlarged on bail, hence the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.3.2019 having no criminal history. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no legal evidence against the applicant. The applicant was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. without giving an opportunity of hearing as well as cross-examination of the witnesses examined before the court. There is no independent witness against the applicant. He further submits that 11 persons are stated to have participated in the incident and the deceased died due to one fatal head injury. There is no evidence as to who was the author of this injury. The injured witnesses in their statement have categorically stated that the applicant was not present on the spot. There is no eye witness account against the applicant and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and also admitted that the case of the present applicant is identical to the case of co-accused- Ravindra Rajput and Brijkishore Rajput, Pappu @ Shiv Kant and Dharmendra, who have been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Mahesh Richhariya involved in S.T. No. 384 of 2012, Case Crime No. 282 of 2012, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 506, 302, 307 IPC, Police Station-Premnagar, District- Jhansi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Raj