1. Learned A.G.A. submits that though instructions are not completed, hence no counter affidavit has been filed by the State.
2. Heard Sri Vikrant Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Arunesh Khare, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Vikas Goswami, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Satyam @ Monu Tiwawri with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. - 370 of 2018, under Section - 307 I.P.C., Police Station - Sumerpur, District - Hamirpur, during pendency of trial.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of offence of attempt to commit murder, punishable with imprisonment upto life;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 03.09.2018, the applicant is in confinement since 01.07.2018. In that regard, it appears, the applicant was apprehended by the Madhya Pradesh Police in another case under Section 25 of Arms Act. Thereafter, he had been produced in the present case;
(iii) as to the criminal history, the same has been explained in para 19 of the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application;
(iv) chargesheet has already been submitted yet trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial;
(v) In such circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant would submit, the F.I.R. allegations are not borne out from the injury report. In that regard, reference has been made to the entry and exist wounds to suggest that the incident as described in the F.I.R. to such injuries. In short, it has been submitted, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.
(vi) The bail application has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A., who would submit, the applicant has a criminal history and that he had been long avoiding arrest. Therefore, he is not entitled to bail at this stage.
(vii) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, keeping in mind the entirety of facts noted above and also the fact that the applicant is working at Madhya Pradesh. Therefore, he is not aware about the present proceeding. Hence, it is found, he is entitled to bail;
(viii) in any case, no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State and or the informant that the applicant, if enlarged on bail would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witnesses.
5. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the final merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
6. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.
7. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
8. It is made clear, in the event of violation of any terms and conditions of the bail order or in the event of any attempt being made by the applicant to intimidate the witness or to tamper the evidence, informant shall be at liberty to file a bail cancellation application supported by the relevant material. That application if filed, may be taken up on priority.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Saif