Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18712 of 2018 Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Prajapati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Singh,Sadhna Upadhyaya,Samriddhi Upadhyaya,Sant Sharan Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Gautam,Vidya Nath Shukla
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
List revised. No one present for first informant.
Heard Sri Yashdev Upadhyay, Advocate holding brief of Sri S.S. Upadhyay, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated due to village party bandi; that as per averments made in F.I.R. promptly lodged by Ram Tirath, his parents aged about 65 and 60 years were working as night watchman at brick kiln of Ahmad Ali and on 24.10.2017 tractor driver Krishna Chaudhary came to him at night and told that one person is beating his parents with iron rod and your parents are lying in verandah of the house of brick kiln in injured condition and when he reached, found that his father was lying injured and his mother was hidden in paddy fields, who were taken to hospital through ambulance, where his father was declared dead and mother is under treatment, and his mother upon being asked told that one person had beaten his father and 02-03 persons were standing outside, but she does not know or identify any of them, and that during night at about 1:30 p.m. certain persons had entered the brick kiln with their torches on and when stopped by his father, one person committed marpeet with his parents; that in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. first informant has not named any person however in his additional statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. by way of improvements he has stated that applicant and others have committed murder of his father; that statement of mother of first informant was recorded after inordinate delay of 03 days wherein several improvements were made and totally a new story was setup to the effect that in the night of 2.7.2017 deceased had seen applicant and his associates, who had committed murder of Qayamuddin son of Barkat Ali and since this fact was disclosed by her husband publicly so in order to make the evidence of murder of Qayamuddin disappear, applicant has caused murder of her husband and subsequently similar statement of tractor driver Krishan was also recorded implicating applicant; that if the widow of deceased i.e. mother of first informant and driver Krishna had identified the miscreants then there was no reason for not naming them in F.I.R. and of mentioning in F.I.R. that mother could not identify any of miscreants; that applicant has been falsely implicated on the basis of suspicion; that applicant had no motive to cause death of Jamuna Rajbhar; that on the basis of concocted statement of Smt. Jasmati Devi, applicant was falsely implicated in Case Crime No.263 of 2017 in which he has been granted bail, copy of which has been produced for perusal and taken on record; that applicant has no other criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 3.11.2017.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let applicant Santosh Kumar Prajapati be released on bail in Case Crime No.363 of 2017, under Sections 302 and 323 I.P.C., P.S. Nautanwa, District Maharajganj on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Tamang