Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34132 of 2019 Applicant :- Shubham Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- D.M.Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against unknown person alleging that on 15.3.2019 they shot fire at Ramesh Yadav, he received one gun shot injury on neck, resultantly died. During investigation, names of Yadav Lal Yadav @ Dode, Ajit and Subham Yadav were surfaced and it was found that Ajit shot fire at deceased on getting contract (money) from Subham and Yadav Lal Yadav @ Dode and countrymade pistol used in this crime was recovered form the possession of co-accused Ajit.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused namely Yadav Lal Yadav @ Dode has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 4.7.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26542 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. During investigation, the name of applicant was disclosed after thought and due legal consultation after 28 days of incident. Only one fire arm injury was found on the body of deceased caused by co-accused Ajit. Main role of firing was assigned to co-accused Ajit. The role of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Ajit. There is no independent witness and no eye witness account against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 21.4.2019 (more than four months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
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 applicant Shubham Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 280 of 2019, under Sections 302, 120-B IPC, Police Station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj 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 :- 22.8.2019 A. Singh