Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44287 of 2017 Applicant :- Shahrukh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Dwivedi,Ehtesham Akhtar,Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri C.P. Singh, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against unknown person alleging that on 21.3.2017, Gulista sister of the complainant was assaulted by acid attack and died on 7.5.2017. During investigation, the name of the applicant was surfaced alleging that there was love affair between the applicant and deceased and family members of the deceased tried to marry her with another person hence the applicant had assaulted her.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 4.4.2017 (more than one year and ten months) having no criminal history. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to suspicion only. Dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by the learned Magistrate concerned on 23.3.2017 in which she had not disclosed the name of the applicant and corroborated the statement made in the FIR and stated that some unknown person had thrown acid on her. After a long time i.e. 2.4.2017 she had given statement before the I.O. in which she had stated that this act was done by the applicant. This statement was made by the deceased after thought and with due legal consultation and on pressure and it has not been recorded by the learned Magistrate, hence there is no legal evidence against the applicant. The applicant was not named in the FIR. There is no eye witness account against the applicant. There is no independent witness against the applicant 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 applicant further submitted that there is no possibility to get this decided in near future.
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.
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 Shahrukh involved in Case Crime No. 271 of 2017, under Section 326A, 302 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Ghaziabad 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 :- 27.2.2019 OP