Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43862 of 2021 Applicant :- Patru Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
Heard Sri Chandra Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.425 of 2020, under Sections 304 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Ranipur, District Mau during the pendency of trial.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the applicant is brother-in-law of the deceased, who was married 20 years back with his brother, she died due to ailments and after last rituals were performed the F.I.R. was lodged against each family member of the husband including the applicant. It is next contended that as per postmortem report the cause of death could not be ascertained and there is no sign of any antemortem injury over the body of the deceased, the applicant has no concern with the affairs of the deceased and her family. It is also contended that the co- accused, Sarvan @ Dadhi Sonkar has already been released on bail by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 18.08.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13273 of 2021, the case of the applicant stands on identical footing to that of the co-accused, hence, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Lastly it is contended that the applicant is in jail since 03.08.2021 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant, Patru involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021 S.P.