Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41373 of 2020 Applicant :- Sonu @ Shivram Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lal Mani Tripathi
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Rajesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Lal Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Sonu @ Shivram with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 533 of 2019, under Sections 302, 147, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Bhognipur, District Kanpur Dehat.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case only on the basis of suspicion and for the last about one year, he has been in jail. The co-accused namely Man Singh and Babli @ Dulhana have already been granted bail of by coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 8.10.2020 and 16.9.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 2967 of 2020 and 24703 of 2020 respectively and co-accused Kanhaiya @ Kandhi has also been released on bail of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27425 of 2020. It has further been submitted that the whole case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant has been in jail since 20.10.2019, hence, he is entitled to bail.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and have submitted that the case of this applicant is different as weapon which was used for the commission of the offence was recovered on the pointing of this applicant.
Upon hearing the submissions made by learned counsel of both sides, considering the contention made above, and without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the 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 applicant 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 :- 5.1.2021 Mini