Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24417 of 2019 Applicant :- Manoj Ram And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Singh,S.K. Verma (Sr. Adv) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. and Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24425 of 2019 Applicant :- Jagarnath Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Singh,Sri S.K.Varma Senior Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Both the aforesaid applications relate to same crime number and were heard together, therefore they are being decided by a common order.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They have not committed the present offence. They are not named in the FIR. Although informant claimed himself to be present at the place of occurrence, but referring to the statement of the informant recorded subsequently by the investigating officer, it is argued that if she was fully aware about the name, address and the role played by the applicants in commission of crime, the same must have been mentioned in the first information report itself. Non disclosing the name of the applicants in the FIR and the role played by each applicants create doubt about the truthfulness of the statement of informant recorded subsequently by the Investigating Officer. It is further argued that applicants were named in this matter only on the basis of suspicion. There is no cogent evidence against the applicants. Applicants have no criminal history. They are languishing in jail since 15.02.2019 and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer for bail has argued that although first information report was lodged against unknown persons, but when the entire facts came into the knowledge of the informant, she has clearly stated the same to the Investigating Officer. Specific role in causing present offence has been assigned to each and every accused in the statement of the informant. There was no reason to falsely implicate the applicants.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicants Manoj Ram, Vinod Kumar and Jagarnath involved in Case Crime No. 0057 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Mau, District - Mau be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two heavy sureties (not less than Rupees six lacs) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
5. The applicants 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 them 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 prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Copy of this order be also placed on record of Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24425 of 2019.
Order Date :- 25.6.2019 Swati