Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32614 of 2019 Applicant :- Mohd. Amzad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ruby Goutam
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Smt. Ladlee Pandey, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against two accused persons, namely Mohd. Amzad and Asif (brother of Amzad) alleging that on 2.2.2019 they abducted Shadab Ahmad (brother of complainant), later on, dead body was found receiving two gun shot injuries. During investigation, names of Ahmad @ Babloo, Sachin Verma and Asif Vakil were surfaced and it was found that Asif and Asif Vakil shot fire at Shadab Ahmad and countrymade pistol was recovered from possession of Asif and Asif Vakil.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused namely Mohd. Ahmad and Sachin Varma Alias Aniket Varma have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.6.2019 and 3.7.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 25548 of 2019 and 26354 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant except the confessional statement of co-accused Asif before the police personnels. Main role of firing was assigned to co-accused Asif and Asif Vakil. The case of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Asif and Asif Vakil. There is general allegation against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 20.2.2019 (more than six month) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
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 the case of present applicant is identical to co- accused Mohd. Ahmad who has 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 applicant Mohd. Amzad involved in Case Crime No. 51 of 2019, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station Kareli, District Prayagraj (Allahabad) 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 :- 21.8.2019 A. Singh