Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19574 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanjeev Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Pandey,Vivek Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits filed today, are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR and that he has been shown involved in the alleged incident merely on the basis of suspicion, as he is a relative of co-accused. There is no evidence, at all, against the applicant. It was submitted that even if there was any enmity or animosity that was between co-accused Raju and deceased and that applicant was not associated with that in any manner. Alleged witness Arun Kumar Mishra in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has merely expressed suspicion that murder of deceased might have been committed by co-accused Raju Singh with the applicant, while another witness Amodh Kumar Tyagi has merely stated that on 26.02.2018, deceased and co-accused Raju have left the company and nothing has been stated by him about the presence of the applicant. It was argued that except the above-stated witnesses, no other person has made any incriminating statement against the applicant. It was further argued that recovery of alleged paper cutter shown by the police is false and no such recovery has been made from the applicant. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. It was further pointed out that applicant is in judicial custody since 03.03.2018, having no criminal history 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. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that during investigation, involvement of the applicant has been found in the alleged incident, however, it has not been disputed that except the above-stated witnesses i.e. Arun Kumar Mishra and Amodh Kumar Tyagi, no other witnesses made any incriminating statement against the applicant.
Applicant is not named in the FIR. As per prosecution version, there was job rivalry between deceased and co- accused Raju Singh and both were working together. There is no eye witness of the alleged incident. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, 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 Sanjeev involved in Crime No. 92/2018, under Sections 302, 34 IPC, P.S. Link Road, District Ghaziabad 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 she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she 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.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019 Anand