Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33125 of 2021 Applicant :- Tinku @ Rinku @ Teepu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Syed Irfan Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hari Prakash Mishra
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is brother of sister-in-law (devarani) of deceased. The FIR was lodged by uncle of deceased against Smt. Sunhari, Tinku, Pooran Singh and Ramratan alleging that after marriage of deceased with Vinod, she was being harassed by his family members and on the night of 11/12.02.2021 they have committed murder of deceased. Learned counsel has submitted that first informant has supported the version of FIR in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., but thereafter, in his supplementary statement, he has back-tracked from the said version and stated altogether a new version that the marriage of deceased has taken place about 11-12 years prior to the incident and that in fact co-accused Smt. Sunhari, who is sister-in-law (devarani) of deceased, used to harass the deceased and that there was no complaint against the other family members of husband of deceased. It has been submitted that a false version was developed that applicant along with two others has come on motorcycle and that in the night, applicant and his companions and said Sunhari have caused death of deceased by strangulation but there is no reliable evidence to support this version. Learned counsel has pointed out that on the date of incident itself, the mother-in-law of deceased has submitted an application to police, wherein, she has stated that her daughter-in-law Gudiya (deceased) was found murdered under suspicious circumstances but at that time she has not made any such allegation that her death was caused by applicant or co-accused persons and this version was developed later on. The alleged statement of son of deceased, who allegedly witness the incident, has been recorded after about one month of incident and there are no reasons that if he has seen the incident, why he did not disclose this for about one month. It was further submitted that except two minor injuries, no other injury has been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death has been shown throttling. Learned counsel has submitted that applicant has no motive at all to cause death of deceased and there is no cogent evidence against him. It has been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2021 having no criminal history and that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the sister of applicant, who is sister-in-law (devarani) of deceased, is a quarrelsome lady and she used to harass the deceased and murder of deceased was committed by her along with applicant and others.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Tinku @ Rinku @ Teepu involved in Case Crime No. 62 of 2021, under Sections 302, 323, 504, 34 IPC, P.S.Sahabar, District Kasganj, be released on bail on furnishing each 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 shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant shall 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 them 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 condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.9.2021 Neeraj