Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12328 of 2021 Applicant :- Ram Dhyan Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Dubey,Manoj Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
This Court has been informed by the concerned Bench Secretary that by the order passed on 05.08.2021 the bail application of the applicant Ram Dhyan Yadav was rejected. However, due to typographical error a wrong order granting bail to the applicant Ram Dhyan Yadav has been transcribed and uploaded in this matter. It has also been brought to the notice of this Court by the concerned PS that by the order dated 05.08.2021 the present bail application was rejected and while taking down the dictation of the said order, the concerned PS in his shorthand note book has noted down that the bail application is rejected, but due to typographical error a wrong order granting bail to accused Ram Dhyan Yadav has been transcribed and uploaded by him. It has also been informed by the concerned PS that the order dated 05.08.2021 has also been got deleted from this Court's online judgement site, today.
This Court finds that the concerned PS has inadvertently committed the aforesaid mistake and transcribed and uploaded a wrong order dated 05.08.2021 in this bail application. therefore, the order dated 05.08.2021 is recalled suo motu by this Court and the order dated 05.08.2021 is substituted by the following order passed today:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 299 of 2020, under sections 302, 404 IPC, P.S. Lar, District Deoria, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant about unnatural death of her husband. It was alleged in the F.I.R that on 26.11.2020 at about 10:00 p.m. her husband went to sleep in the room of his house and the complainant who was sleeping in another room, awoke in the morning and found that her room was locked from outside and the room of her husband was also locked from outside. It was alleged in the F.I.R. that the door of the complainant was opened by her sister-in-law (Jethani) and when complainant entered into the room of her husband, she found her husband lying dead and the blood was oozing from his mouth.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant was not named in the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that his name as an accused in the present case surfaced for the first time in the statements of Raj Nath Yadav, Hari Shanker and Kanhaiya Yadav. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the witness Raj Nath Yadav had seen the present accused Ram Dhyan Yadav coming out from the house of the deceased in the night after incident, and the witness has visited the house of the deceased in the next morning but he has not reported to anybody that he saw in the night the present accused coming out from the house of the deceased. He has further submitted that the informant who is the wife of the deceased was in consensual relationship with the present accused that's why he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The postmortem report of the deceased shows that deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of anti-mrotem injury.
He lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 30.11.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A and it is argued by him that the name of the present accused has come into light very promptly in the statements of independent witnesses. It is also argued that in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present accused was having illicit relationship with the complainant (the wife of the deceased) and was also seen by the independent witness in the night that the present accused was coming out from the place of the incident, the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged offence of murder cannot be ruled out.
After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
The bail application of the applicant Ram Dhyan Yadav is hereby
rejected.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official 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 :- 12.8.2021 LBY