Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17633 of 2019 Applicant :- Pappu Yadav Alias Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bachan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ram Bachan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shoiab Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Pappu Yadav @ Sonu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.586 of 2016, under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station Sadiabad, District Ghazipur.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that injured Ramjeet has assigned the role of causing fire arm injury to injured persons only to co-accused Sandeep Yadav and applicant where as co-accused Bairagi has been assigned the role of causing injury by danda in their hands while in contradiction to above injured Jai Ram and Rekha have stated that fire arm injury was caused to them by co-accused Bairagi and Sandeep Yadav. It is next argued that all the injured persons were discharged on the same day. It is next argued that co- accused Bairagi and Sandeep Yadav @ Dabboo, having identical role, have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 25.05.2018 and 07.09.2018 passed in Crl.Misc. Bail Application Nos.6849 and 24243 of 2018. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. Criminal history has been explained in para 20 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is next contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.07.2016. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Anand Sri./-