Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15943 of 2018 Applicant :- Mungeri Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against five unknown persons alleging that on 15.05.2017 they came with white colour apache motorcycle and looted jewellery shop of complainant and shot fire on Dinesh resultantly he died; on 24.05.2017 two accused persons, namely, Ajay and Rustam were arrested by the Police and Rs. 60,500 from Ajay and Rs. 54,500 from Rustam with one country made pistol from each of the accused persons were recovered; on the confessional statement of these accused before the Police personnel the name of this accused Mungeri and co-accused Chand Khan were surfaced alleging that they were also indulged in this crime.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case by the Police to show his good work only; there is no independent witness against the applicant; the co-accused Chand Khan has already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.12.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47772 of 2017, copy of which has been taken on record; the role of the applicant is identical to the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; there is no recovery on the pointing out of this accused; there is no evidence against this accused; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 17.06.2017 (more than ten months) having no previous criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that he has received no previous criminal history against this accused, the role of this accused is identical to the role of the accused who have already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and the fact that identically placed co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant Mungeri involved in the Case Crime No. 511 of 2017, under Sections 396, 412 I.P.C., P.S. Sikandara, District Agra be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant 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 :- 30.4.2018 A. Tripathi