Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the accused-applicant that co-accused having identical role have already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.05.2016, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15319 of 2016 - (Ruksana @ Santosh Vs. State of U.P.) and in another order dated 30.03.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8757 of 2016 ? (Smt. Muskan Jahan Vs. State of U.P). Copies of the bail orders are annexed as Annexure no. 7 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application.
It is next contended that the applicant is in jail since 27.04.2016 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Seeing the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material brought on record, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, it is a fit case for grant of bail.
Let the applicant ? Smt. Reshma @ Preti involved in Case Crime No. 45 of 2016, under Sections 366, 370 (3) 420 of I.P.C, Police Station ? Majhola, District ? Moradabad, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the order granting bail shall automatically stand cancelled.
Order Date :- 12.07.2016.
Vinod.