Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41792 of 2018 Applicant :- Rajaram Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated for the alleged incident dated 27.10.2017; that as per averments made in F.I.R. on 27.10.2017 at 7:45 a.m. the applicant and others arrived with Lathi, Danda, Bhala (spear) etc. and committed mar-pit with the first informant and his family members resulting in injuries to Ugrasen, Archana, Ramesh and Kamlawati and death of Raja Ram son of Nandu Yadav; that in the F.I.R. no specific weapon or specific role has been assigned to the applicant but in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the first informant and injured witnesses have assigned the applicant with Bhala (spear) and also assigned him with the role of causing injuries with Bhala (spear) to deceased Raja Ram; that the post mortem report of deceased at Annexure-4 shows that the deceased sustained only one muscle deep punctured wound on left side of lower rib border, which may not be considered to be grievous or fatal as the death of the deceased appears to have been committed on account of grievous head injury i.e. injury nos.1 & 2; that the injuries of injured persons are not grievous in nature; that in view of above the applicant may not be considered to be the author of fatal injury; that it appears that the deceased sustained injuries at some other time by some unknown person and due to the dispute over passage the applicant has been falsely implicated; that no grievous injury is alleged to have been caused by applicant; that the case of applicant is distinguishable from others; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 29.10.2017.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail and contended that prompt F.I.R. has been lodged.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Rajaram Chauhan be released on bail in Case Crime No.378 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302/34, 324, 323 I.P.C., P.S. Purandarpur, District Maharajganj, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(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.
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 :- 31.10.2018 Kpy