Single judge allowed criminal bail application of applicant Vidyadhari arrested in a murder case, observing co-accused with similar roles had been granted bail and applicant had no criminal history.
Bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48476 of 2018
Applicant :- Vidyadhari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely Ramraj Kol, Lallan Kol, Jitu Kol, Bidhyadhari Kol and Chibille Kol alleging that on 17.6.2018 in drunk position they assaulted Kamlesh, he received five injuries, one on head, resultantly died.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Lallan Kol and Jeetu Alias Jeet Narayan Adiwasi have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2018 and 3.12.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 45426 of 2018 and 46064 of 2018, 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 was assigned to co-accused Ramraj Kol. Injuries received by the injured are simple in nature except one injury. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 24.6.2018 (more than five and half 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 coaccused Lallan Kol and Jeetu Alias Jeet Narayan Adiwasi 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 Vidyadhari involved in Case Crime No. 160 of 2018 as well as S.T. No. 481 of 2018, under Sections 323, 304 IPC, Police Station Manda, District Allahabad 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:
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 :- 18.12.2018
A. Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering the bail granted to co-accused in identical circumstances.
Vidyadhari
State Of U.P.
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
