Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7903 of 2019 Applicant :- Subhash Chandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Sunil Kumar, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against eleven accused persons, namely Deewan Singh, Jitendra, Pappu, Virendra, Rajeev, Vijay Pratap @ Pancham, Durveen @ Bantu, Sunil, Satendra, Subhash and Rahul alleging that on 30.6.2016 they shot indiscriminate firing at Neeraj and Saurabh. Neeraj received eight injuries, resultantly died. Main role firing was assigned to co-accused Deewan Singh.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused namely Rajeev Kumar and Veerendra have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.11.2017 and 4.8.2017 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44049 of 2017 and 8241 of 2017, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. There is general allegation against the applicant. Main role of firing was assigned to co-accused Deewan Singh. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 10.1.2019 (more than one and half 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 counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
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 and the case of present applicant is identical to co- accused Rajeev Kumar and Veerendra who has been enlarged on bail.
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 Subhash Chandra involved in Case Crime No. 840 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 364, 323, 411, 435, 394 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri 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 :- 25.2.2019 A. Singh