Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Raj Pal vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1665 of 2019 Applicant :- Raj Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saghir Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard Sri Saghir Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra, brief holder for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, on the basis of application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C., F.I.R. was lodged on 6.1.2018 (after two months of incident) against four accused persons, namely Rajpal, Harish, Manoj and Raju alleging that on 10.11.2017 they killed. According to F.S.L. report, aluminium phosphate was found on the body of deceased.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that panchnama and post-mortem were conducted, informant was also the witness of panchanma. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. F.I.R. was lodged after two months on the basis of application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. After thought, the false story was developed with legal consultation due to previous enmity There is general allegation against all accused persons. There is no independent witness and no eye witness account against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 21.10.2018 (near about three months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.
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 Raj Pal involved in Case Crime No. 05 of 2018, under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, Police Station Bhojipura, District Bareilly be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him 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 :- 21.1.2019 A. Singh
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Raj Pal vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 January, 2019
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Saghir Ahmad