Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5221 of 2015 Applicant :- Rakesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shesh Nath Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Madan Singh
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Shesh Nath Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Madan Singh, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Rakesh Yadav in Case Crime No. 242 of 2012 (S.T. No. 870 of 2012), under Sections 302, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Bilari, District- Moradabad with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The alleged incident is said to have taken place in the dark hours of night at about 01 A.M. when the deceased was sleeping at his terrace. It is alleged that the applicant and co-accused Kuwar Pal reached on the terrace of the deceased and on the exhortation of Kuwar Pal, the applicant is said to have fired on the deceased. It is argued that according to prosecution, when the inmates and other witnesses reached near the deceased who was in senses and thereafter he wrote on a piece of paper that it was the applicant who had fired on him. During investigation, the alleged note of the deceased was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, however, the FSL report shows that the handwriting on the note did not tally with the handwriting of the deceased. It is further contended that the manner in which the incident took place, there was no opportunity for anyone to witness the incident. Lastly, it is submitted that he has received information from the wife of the applicant who is an illiterate lady that till date only one prosecution witness has been examined. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 20.5.2012, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that the applicant is the main accused against whom there is consistent version of witnesses that he had fired on the deceased. Therefore, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. However, they could not dispute that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit and is languishing in jail since 20.5.2012 and learned counsel for the informant shows his ignorance regarding the number of witnesses examined during trial.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant- Rakesh Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
However, considering the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.5.2012, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of aforesaid case and conclude the same in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 21.1.2019 Vikas