Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29404 of 2016 Applicant :- Shankar Kharwar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.V. Pandey,Muktesh Kumar Singh,Ramkripal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastav
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri M.K. Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Mahesh Kumar Shukla holding brief of Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastav, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is not named in FIR and has been falsely implicated in view of improvements made by first informant as well as widow of deceased in their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C.; that as per averments made in FIR, deceased had come to hut in his agricultural field for sleeping in the night of 22.02.2016 and was found dead at about 11:00 a.m. on next day when his wife came with lunch for him; that after a period of three days in statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., first informant pointed finger of doubt against applicant Munni Lal and Manoj Giri for the reason that they did not participate in the last rites of deceased, and widow of deceased in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded on 29.02.2016 made similar statement and pointed finger of doubt also on her jeth Sriram Maurya for his changed behaviour since death of Anand Raja; that co-accused Manoj Giri, Sriram Maurya and Munni Lal Kol have been granted bail by other Benches of this Court vide orders dated 08.06.2016, 03.06.2016 and 27.07.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 17530 of 2016, 16964 of 2016 and 24728 of 2016 respectively, copy filed at Annexure Nos. 9, 10 and 11; that case of applicant is identical to above co- accused persons; that applicant had no motive to cause death of Anand Raja; that applicant has explained his criminal history in para 17 of the affidavit given in support of bail application; that apart from above five cases mentioned in para 17, applicant was also falsely implicated in four more cases under Section 110 Cr.P.C. which have been finished; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 07.03.2016.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Shankar Kharwar be released on bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2016 under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., P.S. Chakarghatta District Chandauli on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 M. ARIF