Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2650 of 2021 Applicant :- Vineet Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Himkanya Srivastava,Sanjeev Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant to enlarge him on bail in case crime no. 558 of 2020, under Sections 302, 120-B IPC, Police Station Loni, district Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has not committed the present offence. It is further argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of the witnesses. It is also argued that FIR was lodged on the day of incident and if the witnesses had seen the incident they would have disclosed the name of the applicant in the FIR itself. Referring to the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it was further argued that if these statements are taken into consideration then also main role for causing fire arm injury is assigned to the accused Nikhil. Applicant is said to be sitting on the motorcycle. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant also referred to the C.C.T.V. footage and further argued that in that evidence main role for causing fire arm injury is assigned to co-accused Nikhil. Applicant was not seen near the place of occurrence. FIR lodged on the next day for the offence under Section 392, 506 IPC is an after thought. No such incident ever took place. Applicant is in jail since 20.07.2020 having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. argued that the applicant has actively participated in the commission of the crime. He along with co-accused reached at the place of occurrence on the motorcycle looted by them. Co-accused entered into the shop and opened fire on the deceased. Applicant was standing there along with motorcycle in starting condition. As soon as deceased was done to death by the co- accused, applicant and co-accused both ran away from the place of occurrence on the motor cycle. Thus, active participation of the applicant is apparently clear in the present matter. A prima facie case is made out.
Having considered the rival submissions, going through the entire record and also taking into consideration the contents of the FIR, statement of the witnesses recorded during investigation and also the role played by the applicant, the court is of the opinion that applicant has not made out a case for bail.
Bail Application is hereby rejected. However, Trial Court is directed to decide the trial expeditiously.
Order Date :- 13.8.2021 Sachdeva