Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47749 of 2018 Applicant :- Nitesh@Nikki Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is not named in FIR lodged on 16.11.2017 with inordinate delay of two months; that as per averments made in FIR on 16.09.2017 Vedpal, the brother of first informant was living with his nephew Krishna Kumar had left with named accused Rajveer Singh but he did not reach at his residence on which missing report was given on 24.10.2017 and it appears that Rajveer has made him disappeared; that first informant and other prosecution witnesses have stated that Vedpal had informed his nephew Krishna Kumar that he is in Nainital with Rajveer and applicant; that applicant and Rajveer were arrested on 13.12.2017 with recovery of motorcycle of deceased from their joint possession and recovery of mobile phone of deceased from co-accused Rajveer; that at the time of arrest, it is allged to have been stated by co-accused Rajveer that he along with applicant committed death of Vedpal by drowning in Nainital; that dead body of deceased has been recovered in Nainital, and upon autopsy, cause of death did take place due to asphyxia as a result of drowning; that as per prosecution case, Rajveer had borrowed some money from deceased on account of which he committed murder of Vedpal; that applicant did not borrow any money from deceased and had not motive to cause his death; that case of applicant is distinguishable from named co-accused Rajveer who alleges to have purchased motorcycle of deceased as well as from whom mobile phone of deceased was recovered; that case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no incriminating evidence against applicant; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 02.01.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of 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 Nitesh@Nikki be released on bail in Case Crime No. 413 of 2017 under Sections 364, 302, 201 I.P.C., P.S. Dilari District Moradabad 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 :- 19.12.2018 M. ARIF