Court No. - 57
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24204 of 2017 Applicant :- Sukhveer @ Sukhaa Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ansar Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the records.
The applicant is involved in case crime no. 112 of 2015, under Section 364 IPC, P.S. Ekdil, District Etawah.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is languishing in jail since 22.07.2016. According to the FIR, the informant's son Sushant Pratap Singh had gone missing on 02.03.2015 and of whom recovery was made from the possession of one Baburam @ Bandhan on 07.03.2015 in presence of informant and the evidence has come to the effect that from the mouth of the person Baburam that it was the applicant who had brought the abducted boy by motorcycle and gave him in his custody. Argument advanced on behalf of applicant is that on account of enmity, the name of applicant has been taken, otherwise, there was no such evidence to demonstrate the complicity of applicant in commission of crime. Further argument advanced is that in the trial held of Babu Ram @ Bandhan, he has already convicted and awarded sentence of 3 years, against which he has already filed appeal which has been admitted by this Court on 19.09.2016 and Baburam has been enlarged on bail. The argument therefore, is that except the statement of Baburam, there is no evidence that the applicant abducted the boy in question. Further argument is that there is no criminal history of the applicant.
On contrary, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and considering the fact that Baburam @ Bandhan who had taken the name of applicant, has already been granted bail, even after conviction by lower Court, in criminal appeal, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled for bail.
Let the applicant Sukhveer @ Sukhaa involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
However, applicant has been directed to be enlarged on bail with condition that he shall appear before court concerned as and when required and shall not avoid personal appearance, failing which, lower court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
It is made clear that Identity status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be strictly verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 IrfanUddin