Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7366 of 2018 Applicant :- Raghuveer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Goswami Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Learned counsel for the complainant, Sri A.N. Panday has filed his Vakalatnama and the same is taken on record. He has also provided the photo-copies of injury memo of Smt. Tara.
This Bail Application (under Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 290 of 2017 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 325, 308 and 304 I.P.C., P.S. Barsana, District Mathura.
As per F.I.R., the prosecution case is that on 11.08.2017 at 7.30 a.m., accused Gopi Chandra, Harendra, Sanju, Raghuveer (applicant) came armed with 'lathi-danda' at the house of the complainant/first informant and restrained him from cleaning the drain. On this, the aforesaid persons started beating the first informant and when his wife, Tara, younger brother, Ramu and son, Shyam Singh came there to his rescue, they were also beaten.
It has been argued on behalf of the learned counsel for the accused applicant that accused applicant has been falsely implicated in this case; the beating took place, is admitted to both parties because from his side, N.C.R. was also lodged prior in point of time than the report lodged by the complainant of this case; there was no intention to kill the deceased; the deceased Tara has died on 28.11.2017 i.e. approximately 3 months 17 days after the date of occurrence due to septicemea and thereafter the case was converted into 304 I.P.C.; the accused has no criminal history; the accused applicant is in jail since 9.1.2018.
Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail and stated in rebuttal that the accused Gopi Chand is still absconding. Other injured who have received injuries in this occurrence is also undergoing treatment and has received multiple fractures in his head.
Looking to the fact that deceased had died three months after the date of occurrence due to injuries caused in this occurrence, there is no criminal history, quantum of the punishment, nature of the offence and period of detention in jail, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Raghuveer involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 A. Mandhani