Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.
Heard Sri Madan Singh and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has not committed present offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Initially, an information was given by the father of the deceased at the police station concerned on 17.10.2020 mentioning therein that his son (deceased) has committed suicide. Inquest report was prepared and postmortem on the dead body of the deceased was conducted. Cause of death of the deceased was shown in the postmortem report as ante-mortem throttling. Thereafter, the investigating officer himself had lodged the F.I.R. involving the present applicant and co-accused Kamlesh Yadav alias Shintu on the basis of statement of parents of the deceased. Referring to the statement of parents of the deceased, it is further argued that if they were aware about the cause of death of the deceased, why an information was given to the local police regarding the commission of the suicide by the deceased. It is next argued that none has seen the incident. Applicant was implicated in this matter only on the basis of suspicion. It is further contended that co-accused Kamlesh Yadav alias Shintu, who was also named in the F.I.R., has been allowed on bail vide by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.1.2021 passed in criminal misc. bail application no.4087 of 2021. Role assigned to the applicant is not distinguishable to such extent to deny him bail. It is further argued that applicant is languishing in jail since 23.10.2020 having no criminal antecedents. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., statement of witnesses, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Rakesh Yadav @ Chintu involved in Case Crime No.233 of 2020 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Gyanpur, District - Bhadohi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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. 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.
4. 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 prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
The party shall file self-attested computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad. The concerned Court / Authority / Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 17.8.2021 ss