Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17134 of 2018 Applicant :- Yadram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amitabh Tripathi,Satish Kumar Shukla,Vipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.
Heard Sri Amitabh Tripathi, Sri Satish Kumar Shukla & Sri Bhupendra Pal Singh holding brief of Sri Vipin Kumar, learned counsels for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Yadram in Case Crime No. 0109 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station- Sikandarpur Vaisya, District- Kasganj (Kanshiram Nagar) with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
According to prosecution case, a missing report was lodged by the wife of deceased Pramod Singh alleging that the deceased was missing from 03.05.2017 and on 06.05.2017 the dead body of the deceased was recovered from Ganga river; according to the postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia as a result of drowning; the F.I.R. was lodged on 08.05.2017 after five days of the incident on the basis of suspicion against accused Yadram, Arvind @ Vinda, Ramveer, Udayveer and Jitendra alleging that they had killed the deceased.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that co-accused Ramveer, Jitendra and Arvind @ Binda have already been enlarged on bail by Co- ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 14.03.2018 & 04.05.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 9730 & 16762 of 2018; the role of the applicant is identical to the co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail and he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; there is no independent witness against the applicant; there is no eye-witness account present against the applicant; there is no legal evidence against the applicant; the F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of suspicion with due legal consultation; the name of this accused was disclosed after five days of the incident; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 06.01.2018, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant- Yadram be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 27.10.2018 Vikas