Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23203 of 2019 Applicant :- Prabhu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Vijai Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in case crime no. 122 of 2018 (Session Trial No.15 of 2019), under Sections 302 IPC, P.S. Dildar Nagar, District- Ghazipur is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is not named in the FIR. The informant is elder son of the deceased, who lodged the FIR dated 13.10.2018 at 4.05 P.M. regarding the incident dated 13.10.2018 alleged to have been taken place at 11.30 AM on the basis of statement of alleged eye-witness Chandan Yadav (younger son of the deceased).
As per prosecution case, on 15.10.2018, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of Chandan Yadav (brother of the informant), in which, he has disclosed that he had seen the accused applicant Prabhu Yadav to commit the murder of his mother by Fawra and information about this occurrence given by him to Rinku Kumari, who rushed at the spot. Thereafter, several other persons of the village also rushed to the spot. On the said fact, it is submitted that if Chandan Yadav was eye- witness, then this is improbable that he being real younger brother of the informant will not disclose the fact of committing murder of his mother by the applicant to his elder brother at the time of lodging F.I.R. on 13.10.2018. It is also submitted that the Investigating Officer has not conducted the fair investigation and only after recording the statement of Chandan Yadav on 15.10.2018 submitted charge-sheet on 20.11.2018 in haste manner without making any effort to get the statement of Rinku Kumari recorded in order to elicit the truth. It is also submitted that as per the cite plan, the occurrence took place at the open place in densely populated area, but the Investigating Officer has not recorded the statement of any independent witness of the village. It has been vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR of the present case is ante-dated and ante-time because in the inquest report, no case crime number is mentioned. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no motive on record against the applicant to commit such a crime. The Investigating Officer has closed the investigation by set up a concocted story and writing the statement of the accused from his own while the accused- applicant has not given any such inculpatery statement implicating himself as accused in crime. It is also submitted that the statement of eye-witness Gudri Singh was recorded on 10.11.2018 after 25 days of the occurrence, therefore, same is not liable to be believed. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no direct or indirect evidence on record against the applicant, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2018 and the applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.
Learned AGA as well as Sri Navneet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer of bail by contending that one person of the village namely Gudri Singh had seen the applicant at the time when he was ranning away alongwith weapon of assault, therefore, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Prabhu Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 3.6.2019 AK Pandey