Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49057 of 2019 Applicant :- Mithilesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Hasan,Aditya Vikram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kedar Nath Mishra
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Compliance of affidavit and counter affidavit have been filed on behalf of the State are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR of the alleged incident was lodged against nine named persons including the applicant and three unknown. In first information report the role of causing injury to the deceased with kudal has been assigned to co-accused Vikas son of Akhilesh. The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant and co- accused Kanhaiya have committed marpeet with the injured Jeetan. It has further been submitted that the applicant has not caused any injury to the deceased. A fracture has been found to the injured Jeetan in his left hand's wrist as the injury of the injured is not fatal to life. It has further been submitted that co- accused Sunil Gond and Vikas Yadav son of Vakeel, who are not named in the FIR and Devki Yadav, who is named in the FIR have already been released on bail by another bench of this Court vide orders dated 15.11.2019,7.11.2019 and 21.11.2019 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. It has further been submitted that the applicant has not committed the alleged offence. False allegation has been made against the applicant. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 15.6.2019.
Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail. The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the applicant and other co- accused have assaulted the deceased as well as injured person. The applicant and other co-accused have committed the alleged offence with their common object, therefore the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Mithilesh Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 67 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 304, 308, 323, 325, 395 IPC, P.S. Madanpur, District Deoria 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:-
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 A.