Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri J.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against two persons alleging that Rohni, daughter of the complainant was kidnapped on 11.2.2003. Later on, she was recovered on 14.2.2003. According to postmortem report, cause of death was found asphyxia as a result of strangulation. During investigation, named accused was exonerated and it was found that one Rampal, servant of the applicant, had killed the deceased and raped her. After a long time, the name of the applicant was surfaced alleging that he was also seen with the deceased and Rampal at the time of disposing of body of the deceased.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused-Ram Pal has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.9.2005 in Crl. Misc. Case No. 4788 (B) of 2005 and the case of the applicant is lesser than the case of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, hence the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.12.2018 (about one year) having one case of criminal history which has been properly explained. Due to heavy workload in the trial court, there is no possibility to get this case decided in near future. Maximum offence under Section 201 I.P.C. is made out which is bailable. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no independent witness/eye witness account and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that the case of the present applicant is identical to the case of co-accused-Ram Pal, who has already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Ramakant Chaudhari involved in Case Crime No. 336 of 2003, under Section 363, 376, 302, 201, 120-B IPC, Police Station-Isha Nagar, District- Kheri be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two 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.
4.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.
5.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 court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 OP