Court No. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29385 of 2021 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sudhir Kumar Agarwal
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Sri Jitendra Kumar (Inspector), in compliance of court's order, appeared in the Court and states that there is no criminal history of the present accused-applicant. The personal presence of Sri Jitendra Kumar, Inspector, is exempted until further order.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sudhir Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.
Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No.
75 of 2021, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Mansoorpur, District Muzaffar Nagar, applied for bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits in following manner :-
(i) Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has committed no offence. Entire prosecution story is false and fake.
(ii) Although the applicant is named in the FIR but he has no concern with the present case. As per the postmortem report, cause of death not asserted. Viscera has been preserved but no FSL report is still received there. This is not the case of direct evidence. Nobody has seen the accused- applicant killing the deceased. The entire allegations is against co-accused Dharamveer Singh, Sumit & Sonu both sons of Dharamveer Singh but it is said that present accused-applicant has been seen by the witness in the house of Dharamveer Singh where victim was found in injured position. Informant is not eye witness, witness Satish who is the brother of the deceased and witness of inquest, first time, disclosed the name of present applicant in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. after a considerable delay.
(iii) Applicant is in jail since 08.05.2021 without any credible evidence and having no criminal history. There is no possibility of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Due to heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no possibility of early conclusion of the trial.
Though learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but considered that there is no evidence of eye-witness or last seen. No direct or circumstantial evidence are present against the applicant. Only his presence is said in the house of Dharamveer Singh.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.
Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Sonu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
2. The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.
3. During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 SA Digitally signed by RAJENDRA KUMAR Date: 2021.12.24 10:52:54 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad