Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20192 of 2018 Applicant :- Vinay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pushkar Srivastava, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 5.1.2017 against four accused persons, namely Hetram, Vinay, Karu and Bhura alleging that on 25.12.2016 they killed Bhikam Singh and dead body of deceased was recovered, received one gun shot injury. During investigation, it was found that co-accused Karru shot fire at deceased and one country-made pistol was recovered from his possession.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused namely Hetram, Karu and Bhura have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2017 and 12.10.2017 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.27645 of 2017 and 39673 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. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Main role of firing was assigned to co-accused Karru. There is general allegation against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness and eye witness account against the applicant. It is a case of circumstantial evidence, no chain is established to connect the applicant with this crime. He is languishing in jail since 22.3.2018 (more than two 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 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 Hetram, Karu and Bhura 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 Vinay involved in Case Crime No. 07 of 2017, under Sections 302, 364, 201 IPC, Police Station Amanpur, District Kasganj 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 :- 29.5.2018 A. Singh