Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2318 of 2018 Applicant :- Saraya @ Sarya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mr Sunil Vashisth,Chandrajeet,Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.
Heard learned advocate of the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
This is the second bail application. The contention in the second bail application is that the applicant is woman with no previous criminal history and in jail since 07.06.2016. It is further submitted that co-accused Sirajuddin and Sarfaraj both have been granted bail. The further contention is that the subsequent to the rejection of the first bail application, the first informant Shahnavaz- P.W.1 and he has been declared as hostile, a copy of his statement has been annexed as annexure 12 (Page 56) in the bail application.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid subsequent development and the fact that applicant is in jail since 23.3.2016 with no criminal history, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out. However, the said prima facie view of this Court will not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant Sayara @ Smt. Sarya involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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 with 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 complainant 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 and Hussain and Another v. Union of India; 2017 (5) SCC 702, 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 :- 27.7.2018 Abhishek