Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32631 of 2018 Applicant :- Sumit Shakya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anvir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Anvir Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
According to the prosecution version the complainant lodged FIR against three named persons including the applicant alleging that the accused persons had gone at the shop of one Abhishek Gupta where the injured was working and on the exhortation of co-accused Nikky Sharma accused Amit Shakya fired upon the injured causing injury to him.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. The role of firing has been assigned to co-accused Amit Shakya. No specific role is attributed to the applicant. There is undue delay in lodging the FIR for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. The injured in his statement before the investigating officer has not assigned the role of firing to the applicant. Nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. As per injury report the injured has sustained only lacerated wounds. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 7.5.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
Having considered the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant Sumit Shakya be released on bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2018, under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Bewar, District- Mainpuri, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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 :- 28.8.2018 IA