Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41201 of 2018 Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Rajesh in connection with Complaint Case No.1160 of 2016 under Section 147, 344, 383, 376 IPC, P.S. Kanth, District Shahjahanpur.
Heard Sri Ved Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent. The incident allegedly happened on 02.01.2016, but no FIR was lodged. No application was also made to register an first information report by invoking the provisions of Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. It is argued that there is absolutely no medico legal evidence available to support the allegation of gang rape with the prosecutrix, and, in fact, no medico legal examination was undertaken. It is submitted that the applicant has been roped in on account of issues with co- accused Shaukhin and Virendra, and, that the applicant has been roped in, in order to give more teeth to the case. It is emphatically argued that on identical allegations co-accused Yogesh Singh and Vimlesh Singh @ Pinku Yadav have been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11267 of 2018, whereas Virendra Singh, another co- accused was granted bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24158 of 2018, both by a common order dated 16.08.2018. Likewise, co-accused Shaukhin has been granted bail on the basis of parity in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34395 of 2018 vide order dated 27.09.2018. It is submitted that the applicant is, in addition, also entitled to bail on account of parity.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but does not deny the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the belated case on a private complaint through which the prosecutrix has deposed in support of the prosection but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Rajesh involved in Complaint Case No.1160 of 2016 under Section 147, 344, 383, 376 IPC, P.S. Kanth, District Shahjahanpur be released on bail on 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.
v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 29.10.2018 Deepak