Court No. - 4
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31959 of 2018 Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Mddeshiya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 129 of 2018, under Section 302, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 4/25 of Arms Act, P.S.- Chilautal, District- Gorakhpur, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. of the incident which was lodged by the brother of the deceased Vinod Kumar Sharma stating therein that some unknown persons had caused injuries to the deceased by knife and injured him badly and he died while on his way to the hospital on 30.03.2018. He next submitted that the name of the applicant as an accused surfaced for the first time in the statements of Sushil Kumar Sharma and Virendra Sharma who had stated that they had seen the applicant and co-accused Anup Sharma near the place of incident. He next submitted that the applicant has further been implicated in the present case on the basis of his confessional statement recorded before the police after he was arrested and the alleged recovery of the crime weapon and blood-stained shirt of the applicant on the joint pointing out of the applicant and other co-accused which has apparently been fabricated by the police and which is inadmissible in evidence. He next submitted that there is no direct evidence against the applicant indicating that he had committed the murder of the deceased. The confessional statement on record is not sufficient to link the applicant with the crime in question. He lastly submitted that the applicant who has no criminal antecedents to his credit and is in jail since 01.04.2018, is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial.
The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A.
Keeping in view the submissions of 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 entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant, Sandeep Kumar Mddeshiya be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 129 of 2018, under Section 302, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 4/25 of Arms Act, P.S.- Chilautal, District- Gorakhpur, subject to the following conditions:-
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the informant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
However, it is directed that the aforesaid case crime number pending before the concerned court below be decided expeditiously, as early as possible in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle as has been laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court is directed to initiate necessary coercive measure for ensuring their presence.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 KS