Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25694 of 2018 Applicant :- Rahul Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajatshatru Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,M.P. Singh Yadav,M.P.Singh Yadav
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.
Heard Sri Ajatshatru Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri M.P.Singh Yadav,learned counsel for the complainant and Sri S.S.Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
According to the prosecution version the complainant lodged FIR against six named persons including the applicant alleging that all the accused who were armed with country made pistol and gun caused injury to the complainant and his brothers when they were standing at Bada of the complainant.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to old enmity and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that the general role of firing has been assigned to tall the accused and no specific role is attributed to the applicant. The FIR is unduly delayed by one day for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. The two injured persons have sustained injuries on non-vital parts which are simple in nature as per medical report. In fact nobody has witnessed the occurrence. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 9.5..2018. The applicant has criminal history of four cases which have been explained properly in paragraph 25 of the affidavit filed in support of he bail application.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Rahul Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 125 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 504, 506 I.P.C , P.S.
Sipri Bazar, District- Jhansi 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:
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 30.8.2018 IA