Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a case of disproportionate assets. The Investigating Officer has estimated the income of the applicant to be Rs. 14,34,345/- and the expenditure has been estimated to be 14,93,008/- Therefore, there was a sum of rupees more than five lakhs as uncounted assets.
Learned counsel further submitted that the agricultural income of the applicant has not been taken into account and the immovable property purchased in the year 1981 was valued at the market rate in the year 2002.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Maiku Lal Verma involved in Case Crime No. 438 of 2004, under Sections 13(1)(e) R/w 13(2) PC Act, P.S. Kotwali, District-Lakhimpur Kheri 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:-
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him;
(b) 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.
Order Date :- 29.2.2012 Ashish Nayan