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

Rajnish @ Chhotu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22715 of 2019 Applicant :- Rajnish @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gopal Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra (B.H.), learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against four accused persons, namely, Manish Kumar (husband), Ram Bharosa (father-in-law), Smt. Savitri Devi (mother-in- law) and Chhotu (Devar) alleging that Lakshmi @ Pooja, daughter of the complainant was married with Manish Kumar on 10.2.2012. For demand of Rs.50,000/- and motorcycle on 19.5.2018 they killed her by throwing kerosene oil and setting her on fire.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused Smt. Savitri Devi and Ram Bharosa have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 20.8.2018 23.5.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 31374 of 2018 of 21581 of 2019. The applicant is brother- in-law (devar) of the deceased and he is languishing in jail since 18.4.2019 (near about one and half months) having no criminal history. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Deceased committed suicide herself and she was admitted in the hospital by the husband (Manish Kumar). Dying declaration of the deceased was not recorded. Over all, he is not beneficiary of motorcycle and cash. He is living separately. He has no concern with wife and husband. There is no independent/eye witness account. 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 Rajnish @ Chhotu involved in Case Crime No. 0331 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Karvi, District Chitrakoot 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 :- 30.5.2019 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

Rajnish @ Chhotu vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 May, 2019
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Gopal Verma