Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11633 of 2018 Applicant :- Rahul Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Imran Ullah,Mohd Imdad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to the prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely, Rahul Yadav ( the applicant), Shiva Thakur, Kanha Pandit and Pintu Yadav @ Cheeni alleging that they assaulted the injured Dhuvendra Kumar and he has received firearm injury on his stomach.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; the injury received by the injured are simple in nature and not dangerous to life; general role has been assigned against all the accused persons; after thought the injured in his statement assigned the specific role of firing to the accused-applicant, there is no independent witness against the applicant; the co-accused Shiva Thakur has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 19.1.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2239 of 2018, copy of which is annexed at page 38 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application; the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is in jail since 16.11.2017 (more than 4 and a half month) having no previous criminal history; one case has been roped on the same day of the incident; there is no ballistic report against this accused to show that firing was caused by this accused.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that one case has been roped on the same day of the incident, the role of this accused is identical to that of co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Rahul Yadav involved in the Case Crime No.555 of 2017, under sections 307, 384, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sasni Gate, District Aligarh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Su