Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34304 of 2019 Applicant :- Raja @ Vivek Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been submitted that the applicant was implicated in the murder of son of the informant in the year 2016. He has been enlarged on bail on 06.07.2018. In the present case the applicant has been implicated on the allegation that after being released on bail, he came to the house of the informant on 14.04.2019 and threatened him for direct consequences in case he does enters into compromise in the criminal case regarding the murder of his son by the applicant.
Counsel for the applicant has pointed out to the bail order passed by this court releasing the applicant on bail wherein P.W.-3, Ravindra, who was a witness of fact was found to have turned hostile and therefore the applicant was released on bail by this court on 06.07.2018 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19461 of 2018. It is clear that the applicant was released on bail 06.07.2018 and from 06.07.2018 to 14.04.2019 no untoward incident took place. In the FIR it has been mentioned that after being released on bail, the applicant came to the house of the informant and threatened him. This contention is not proved from material on record.
Finally, it has been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 15.04.2019 and only after the informant found that the chances of his conviction are becoming bleak, he has been falsely implicated in a fresh case.
Sri Santosh Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the informant has vehemently opposed bail application on the ground that the applicant is the sole accused in the murder of the son of the informant and is misusing the liberty of bail granted to him by this court in the year 2018. He has resorted to threatening of informant and therefore he does not deserves to be enlarged on bail by this court.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
After considering the rival submissions noted hereinabove, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the material brought on record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant Raja @ Vivek, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 65 of 2019, under Sections- 452, 504, 506, 307 IPC, Police Station- Sector Chandi Nagar, District- Baghpat, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice :-
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.
4. In case the applicant indulges in any act of threatening to the informant or any other witness of the earlier trial, it would be open for the informant to move bail cancellation application.
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 :- 22.8.2019 Rohit