Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel filed Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, be taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR of the alleged incident was lodged against 6 persons including the applicant making general allegation for committing marpit with the deceased.. According to postmortem report 6 injuries were found on the body of the deceased and cause of death of the deceased has been shown shock and haemorrhage due to ante mortem head injury. It has further been submitted that informant Brijesh Kumar Dwivedi in his statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. has assigned the role of exhortation to the applicant and role of causing injury to the deceased with iron rod has been assigned to co-accused Raja, although in his statement he has stated that all the accused persons have committed marpit with the deceased with Lathi and Danda. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. It has further been submitted that the case of applicant is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Ramdutt and Raja. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. It has further been submitted that applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 29.9.2018.
Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in FIR it has been mentioned that applicant and other co-accused have committed marpit with the deceased. Informant Brijesh Kumar Dwivedi has also made allegation against all the accused persons for committing marpit with the deceased. The applicant and other co-accused have committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Radheshyam Sonkar involved in Case Crime No. 232 of 2018, under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Hussainganj, District Fatehpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. He shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.
3. He shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Masarrat