Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20461 of 2019 Applicant :- Pradeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Tyagi,Amit Kumar,Gautam Dubey,Mayank Yadav,Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.
Heard leaned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material brought on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 287/2018, under Section 302 PC, police station Rohta, District Meerut with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused- applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that there is no eye witness of alleged incident and that as per F.I.R., deceased was taken away on the night of 16.09.2018 and first informant got information about murder of deceased on the next day morning and thus, it is clear that informant was not an eye witness of incident. Learned counsel has referred the charge-sheet submitted against the applicant and co-accused persons and pointed out that in fact no witness has been cited in the charge-sheet as eye witness of incident. It was further submitted that dead body of deceased was recovered outside the 'Gher' of applicant, which is an open place and thus, recovery of dead body at that place cannot be considered as an incriminating circumstance against the applicant and that recovery of 'Dao' shown from the applicant is also false and there is no independent witness of said recovery. It was further submitted that statement of first informant has also been recorded before the trial court but his statement regarding the fact that deceased was taken away by applicant is thoughtfully unreliable. It was further argued that the applicant is in judicial custody since 17.09.2018, having no criminal history and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. It was further submitted that in F.I.R. as well as in statement of first informant it has been mentioned that deceased was taken away by applicant to his 'Gher' and thereafter on the next day morning dead body of deceased was recovered from there and that weapon of offence i.e. 'Dao', used in the incident, was also recovered at the instance of applicant.
After considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, looking into the seriousness of the allegations, gravity of the offence, severity of punishment and considering all attending facts and circumstances of the case, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant Pradeep is rejected.
However, keeping in view the period of detention of the applicant, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of nine months from the date of production/receipt of a copy of this order.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned court below for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 7.10.2021 Anand