Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43571 of 2021 Applicant :- Tanuj Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Pathak,Arvind Kumar Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 186/2021, under Sections 302, 201, 411, 394, 120-B, 34 IPC, police station Quarsi, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that applicant is not named in F.I.R., which was lodged against unknown persons. It was further submitted that there is no eye witness of alleged incident and there is also no such circumstantial evidence like that of last seen against the applicant. It was also submitted that alleged incident has been shown of 19.02.2021 and after that recovery of some jewellery was shown from applicant, but the alleged recovery is false and it was planted upon the applicant. Learned counsel has submitted that except the said recovery, there is no other evidence against the applicant. Learned counsel has further submitted that in fact applicant is a friend of co-accused Shehjal Chauhan @ Rini and they have got married co-accused Sonam @ Chittra with son of informant and that they have been falsely implicated in this case due to that reason. It was submitted that there is no such case that applicant was seen in the CCTV footage. It was also submitted that there is no credible evidence against the applicant and that co-accused Shehjal Chauhan @ Rini and Sonam @ Chittra have already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court, copies of which have been annexed with the application. It has further been argued that the applicant is in judicial custody since 21.02.2021, having no criminal history and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, it has not been disputed that similarly placed co-accused Shehjal Chauhan @ Rini and Sonam @ Chittra have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court.
Perusal of record shows that applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and that the motive of alleged incident has been shown against co-accused Yogesh, who is son of first informant and deceased and huge recovery of jewellery was shown from him. Except recovery of some jewellery items, no other evidence could be shown against the applicant and that similarly placed co- accused Shehjal Chauhan @ Rini and Sonam @ Chittra have already been granted bail. It appears that the case of applicant is distinguished from co-accused Yogesh.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Tanuj Chaudhary involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021 Anand