Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42619 of 2018 Applicant :- Vipin Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradyumn Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Sri Mukesh Kumar Maurya and Smt. Rinki Gupta filed their vakalatnama which are taken on record.
Heard Sri Pradyumn Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mukesh Kumar Maurya, Smt. Rinki Gupta on behalf of the 1st informant.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is not named in FIR lodged by father of deceased on 14.03.2018, with the averments that the dead body of his son has been found in wheat fields of Kaptan Singh whose throat has been slitted, and he believes that his brother Balveer has caused his death along with his associates; that there is no incriminating evidence against the applicant, and the applicant had not motive to cause death of Ravish; that in his additional statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded after a period of about five months on 06.08.2018, the first informant has stated that he has enquired that Ravish has been murdered by Avnish, Anuj and Vipin (the applicant), and that Ravish used to ply tempo and Mohan Singh son of Balveer Singh had met with an accident because of which enmity, these persons have slitted throat of his son; that similar statement has been given by wife of first informant; that upon above statements, the applicant was picked on 10.08.2018 and his confessional statement was recorded in police custody to the effect on 13.03.2018 at about 10:00 pm, he and Anuj caught hold of hands and legs of Ravish, and Avnish slitted his throat and thus they taken revenge of the murder of Mohan son of Balveer after a period of one year; that the confessional statement of applicant in police custody is not admissible in evidence; that the weapon of crime, knife has been recovered from co-accused Avnish, and nothing incriminating has been recovered from applicant; that the case of applicant is distinguishable from Avnish; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 23.08.2018.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Vipin Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 215 of 2018 under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Karhal 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 trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(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.
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 :- 30.11.2018 M. ARIF