Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17617 of 2019 Applicant :- Puran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, 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 – Puran with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.678 of 2018, under Section 307, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Jamunapar, District Mathura.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as per allegation in the FIR while the brother of the informant had gone to collect money from the place of applicant there was some dispute in which the applicant along with four other accused persons had assaulted his brother with different weapons like lathis, saria and sharp edged weapon. In the statement of the injured role of causing injury has been assigned to the applicant and co-accused Sonu by lathi as well as sharp edged weapon. As per the medical report, injury nos.4 and 6 are said to be grievous in nature, which are Cont. swelling (6 c.m. x 5 c.m.) on right elbow and arm lower part and Cont. swelling (4 c.m. x 5 c.m.) on right forearm upper part whereas injuries no.1, 2 and 5 are said to be simple in nature. In the statement of the doctor except injury no. 3, all the injuries were kept under observation. In the statement of the injured it is stated that on the day when he had gone to collect money which was due upon the applicant Puran at his place, where the injured enjoyed liquor with them and the injured stayed at Puran's place. On the next day morning when the injured started demanding money they had a quarrel in which the applicant and co-accused Sonu assaulted the injured. It is argued that there are variations regarding time of incident as well as medical which falsify the prosecution story. It is next contended that 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 08.02.2019. 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 :- 30.4.2019 Anand Sri./-