Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40564 of 2019 Applicant :- Navneet Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, K.P. Tiwari, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against six accused persons, namely, Adarsh Tripathi, Himanshu Singh, Hariom Tripathi, Navneet Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav, Prashant Upadhya and Saurabh Vishwakarma alleging that in the intervening night of 14/15.4.2019 they killed Rohit Shukla Betu, son of the complainant, by shooting with firearm. He died receiving four gun shot injuries. Main role of firing at the deceased was assigned to Adarsh Tripathi, Himanshu Singh and Hariom Tripathi and the role of catching hold to the deceased was assigned to Navneet Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav, Prashant Upadhya and Saurabh Vishwakarma. Country made pistols used in the crime were recovered at the pointing out of Adarsh Tripathi, Himanshu Singh and Hariom Tripathi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 16.5.2019 (more than four months) having criminal history of one case which has been explained. Applicant was linked with the crime falsely. The role of the applicant is catching hold. Main role of firing has been assigned to Adarsh Tripathi, Himanshu Singh and Hariom Tripathi. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused-Adarsh Tripathi, Himanshu Singh and Hariom Tripathi. Co-accused Prashant Upadhyay and Saurabh Vishwakarma have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 22.8.2019 & 19.9.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.34186 of 2019 & 37416 of 2019 respectively (Bail orders are annexed as annexure 9 to the bail application), applicant's case is identical to them and he is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned Brief Holder opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that role of the applicant is of catching hold only and his case is identical to aforesaid co-accused who have been granted bail by this Court.
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 Navneet Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 280 of 2019, under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 IPC, Police Station-Colonelganj, District-Prayagraj 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 :- 30.9.2019 P.P.