Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6719 of 2018 Applicant :- Satya Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Babu Sharma,Ardhendu Shekhar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Satya Prakash seeking bail in Case Crime No. 381 of 2017, under Section 302 IPC, P.S. Gunnaur, District Sambhal.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. As per the allegations made in the FIR, it was stated that the victim has been done to death by her husband and her in-laws on account of non-fulfilment of demand of dowry, as such, a case under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC was registered against the husband and his family members by the father of the deceased.
However, after six days of the incident, an affidavit has been filed by the first informant father of the deceased before the Circle Officer alleging therein that he had lodged an earlier FIR against his son-in-law and his family members but now he has came to know that they are not responsible for the death of his daughter. In fact, one Gendi @ Genda Lal, who used to had an evil eye on his daughter, along with the present applicant Satya Prakash has caused the death of the deceased and he, in his, statement under Section 161 CrPC reiterated the same version, however, there is no material to corroborates the said allegation.
The Investigating Officer has further recorded the statement of Seva Ram and Ajay Pal, who, in their statement, has stated that on 01.06.2017, while they were going towards the jungle, they had seen Genda Lal having an altercation with the deceased and subsequently, they came to know that Mamta has been done to death.
On the basis of which, he raised the suspicion that Genda Lal is responsible for causing the death of the deceased Ram Dulari @ Mamta. The same version has been reiterated by the other witness Ajay Pal and on the basis of said information, the case has been converted under Section 302 IPC and the applicant has been nominated as an accused.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that neither in the statement of Seva Ram nor in the statement of Ajay Pal, the applicant has been assigned any role and the role has been assigned to the co-accused Genda Lal.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 12.07.2017.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Satya Prakash be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 Nadim