Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20752 of 2019 Applicant :- Raju Dharkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against unknown persons alleging that on 3.5.2018 some unknown persons shot fire at Basanta Yadav. He received one gun shot injury and died resultantly. During investigation, eye-witness Subhash Yadav son of Basanta stated that Neeraj Rawat and Gorakh @ Ashish Rajbhar ate eggs at the shop of Basanta and on non-payment, quarrel took place. Thereafter, same day at 10:30 P.M., Neeraj Rawat and Gorakh alongwith their associates came, one accused assaulted Subhash Yadav with lathi and shot at Basanta. When Rajesh Kumar Yadav came for rescue he was also shot fired. At night someone shot fire at Rajesh Yadav who was found dead next day in garden of Sarvjeet Yadav. Basanta Yadav received one entry & one exit firearm wound on chest and two other injuries on elbow and forehead and died resultantly. Rajesh Yadav received two entry and two exit wounds. Later on, Asish Rajbhar was arrested by the police he stated that Pankaj Bharti, Prince Sharma and Babu Rajbhar were also indulged in the incident. One country-made pistol was recovered from Neeraj @ Ragadu and Ashish Rajbhar. Neeraj in his confessional statement stated that he shot fire at Basanta and Rajesh both and they died resultantly. They had some dispute with Basanta Yadav. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant had not caused any injury to the deceased persons and he is not named in the FIR. His name came into light in the confessional statement of co-accused Neeraj Rawat, Ashish Rajbhar and Gorakh @ Ashish Rajbhar. Except the confessional statement of co accused there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant. It has further been submitted that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. The co- accused Pankaj Kumar Bharti, Prince Sharma, Babu Rajbhar @ Sandeep Rajbhar having identical role have already been released on bail vide orders dated 2.4.2019, 8.1.2019, 29.11.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 13613 of 2019, 480 of 2019 and 45158 of 2018 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no previous criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 3.5.2018.
Per contra; learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that co-accused Pankaj Kumar Bharti, Prince Sharma, Babu Rajbhar @ Sandeep Rajbhar having identical role have already been released on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Raju Dharkar involved in Case Crime No. 180 of 2018, under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 506 IPC, P.S.
Sarnath, District Varanasi be released on bail 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:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and he shall cooperate with the trial.
3. The applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Gss