Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17620 of 2019 Applicant :- Rauf Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Umair Mahmood Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Umair Mahmood, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sheetal Prasad Chakravorty, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Rauf with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Complaint Case No.1539 of 2019 (Old Complaint Case No.488 of 2012), under Section 307 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to matrimonial dispute. It is next argued that complainant Mohd. Naseem filed a complaint against accused persons Farookh and Rauf (applicant) alleging therein that his sister has filed a case against the accused persons, who are pressuring him and his family members for compromise and on 03.07.2012 at about 6 p.m. accused persons armed with country made pistols entered in his house and opened fire upon Furkan as a result of which he sustained fire arm injuries. It is next contended that there is matrimonial dispute between the complainant and the accused persons. The injuries are simple in nature. It is next contended that co-accused Nabeel, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.07.2018 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.15568 of 2018. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.03.2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Anand Sri./-