Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 901 of 2019 Applicant :- Ram Bhajan Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Dharmendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 223 of 2018, under Sections 364, 302, 201, 120B/34, P.S. Chakia, District Chandauli with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.There is delay in lodging the FIR and that there is no eye- witness of alleged incident. It was submitted that even as per prosecution version, except the last seen evidence, there is no other evidence against the applicant. As per prosecution version, the dead body of deceased has been recovered at the instance of accused Ram Singhasan Singh and that co-accused Ram Bhawan @ Bansh Narayan Yadav has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.02.2019, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7539 of 2019. Learned counsel stated that the applicant has been implicated in this case merely on the basis of suspicion. It was further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2018 and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant is named in the FIR and there is evidence that deceased was taken away from his home by him and co-accused. It was further submitted that there is criminal history of several cases against the applicant and that applicant is not entitled for parity on the ground that co-accused Ram Bhawan @ Bansh Narayan Yadav has already been granted bail by this Court.
Perusal of record shows that applicant is named in the FIR and there is criminal history of four cases against him. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 A. Tripathi