Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23672 of 2019 Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ghan Shyam,Vivek Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Piyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Pradeep Kumar Mishra with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.18 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Ghorawal, District Sonbhadra.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is argued that the FIR has been lodged on 17.02.2019 by one Sri Vijendra Prasad, who is the Village Pradhan, against unknown persons alleging therein that on 17.02.2019 at about 4.00 p.m. he was told by some persons that a dead body was lying in burnt condition in the forest outside the village, but the dead body could not be identified. Since the deceased was uncle of the applicant, hence he was arrested on 11.03.2019, but till that date there was no evidence against the applicant. The statements of three witnesses, namely, Thakur Prasad Jaiswal, Ram Anuj Jaiswal and Suresh had been recorded, who have stated that they saw a motorcycle, on which three persons were sitting, going towards forest of Bishahi, out of which only two persons returned, but they did not recognize the persons sitting on motorcycle. It has been argued that the deceased was in jail in some case and after being released on 14.02.2019 he returned home on 16.02.2019 after which his dead body was found on 17.02.2019. Learned counsel has also pointed out that one application has been given by one Jamuna Prasad before the Superintendent of Police, Sonbhadra with whom there was a family dispute of the applicant, anticipating danger of life of deceased. It is argued that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant to connect him with the present crime and no role has been assigned to him in the statement of eye witnesses. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and 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 12.03.2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the State 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 :- 7.6.2019 Anand Sri./-