Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20816 of 2018 Applicant :- Santosh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Brajesh Kumar Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged on 16.1.2018 against two accused persons, namely Devendra and Ramveer alleging that on 25.12.2017 they assaulted Mahaveer, he received injuries, resultantly died. According to postmortem report, cause of death was found strangulation and viscera was preserved. According to statement of one Avanesh, deceased and four accused persons namely Devendra, Santosh, Pappu and Mangli consumed wine, thereafter this incident was done by Devendra with the help of other accused persons.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused namely Mangali Alias Udaiveer and Pappu have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 25.4.2018 and 10.5.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15272 of 2018 and 17468 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. After one month of incident, the name of the applicant was disclosed by Avanesh and Munendra in his statement, they are the witness of Panchayatnama. After thought, the false story was developed with legal consultation due to previous enmity. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 4.2.2018 (more than three and half months) 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 counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and the case of present applicant is identical to co- accused Mangali Alias Udaiveer and Pappu who has been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, 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 Santosh involved in Case Crime No. 39 of 2018, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Uzahni, District Budaun 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 he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he 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 so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 31.5.2018 A. Singh