Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11325 of 2018 Applicant :- Ramesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Saroj Kumar Dubey,Brij Raj Singh,Kaushlendra Kumar Yadav,Shiv Shanker Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Virendra Kumar Pal
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Brij Raj Singh, Sri Shiv Shanker Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 683 of 2017, u/s 302, 201, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Pavara, District Jaunpur with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity. According to prosecution, incident took place at Sasural of the applicant wherein it is alleged that on the fateful day i.e. 15.12.2017 the deceased young girl aged about 15 years was done to death and her dead body was thrown, though nobody was named in the F.I.R. During investigation, prosecution introduced one witness Neetu Yadav, who happens to be sister-in-law (Saali) of the applicant, she has admitted that she was having illicit relation with the applicant and on the fateful day when they were seen in an objectionable position by the deceased she along with applicant murdered her and thrown her dead body. It is argued that Neetu Yadav has also been made an accused and therefore, no reliance can be placed in her statement at this stage, thus, the applicant, who is in jail since 20.12.2017 may be enlarged on bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is no reason for falsely implicating the applicant and during investigation besides the statement of Neetu, statements of other witnesses were also recorded who had seen the applicant and co-accused throwing the dead body in a field, the deceased was aged about 15 years was found naked and also several injuries were found in her body.
Having heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and considering the nature and gravity of offence, I do not find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.
Considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 20.12.2017, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within the period of nine months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order before the trial court.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Dhirendra/