Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2602 of 2019 Applicant :- Manoj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Dubey,Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Sri Jagdev Singh filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of first informant which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Anurag Dubey, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Jagdish Singh, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated due to old enmity; that as per averments made in FIR lodged at 01:42 p.m. on 24.07.2018, first informant, Dharmaveer Singh was coming from jungle along with his son Gajendra and at about 09:00 p.m. on 23.07.2018 when he reached near basti, accused persons surrounded them with pistols in their hands and upon exhortation fired at them resulting in his death of Gajendra and also beaten him with butts of pistols resulting in injuries to him and wife of first informant who was searching for them with torch seen the incident and identified miscreants; that statement of first informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is in-contradiction to the averments made in FIR, wherein he has stated that firearm injuries were caused to deceased by co-accused Nripendra and Vipin, and all the four accused persons beaten first informant with butt of pistols and they also beaten deceased with butt of double barrel gun of deceased which was also damaged and thrown around the body of deceased; that recovery of pistol has been made from co-accused Nripendra; that applicant has not been assigned with the role of causing firearm injury to deceased, and he may not be considered to be author of his fatal injuries; that case of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Nripendra and Vipin; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 25.07.2018.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that applicant has committed the incident in common intention with co-accused persons; that regarding incident in question, FIR has been lodged by wife of co-accused Vipin on 06.08.2018 at Case Crime No. 259 of 2018 under Sections 452, 307 IPC with a different version and applicant has not disclosed the fact regarding lodging of above FIR; that applicant is not entitled for bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Manoj be released on bail in Case Crime No. 248 of 2018 under Sections 302, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Dehat District Bijnor on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 M. ARIF