Court granted bail to applicant accused of poisoning. Order issued based on parity with co-accused already released on bail by a coordinate bench, without expressing an opinion on case merits.
Release on bail upon executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties with specified conditions regarding tampering with evidence and threatening witnesses.
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. - 6061 of 2018
Applicant :- Ramashre Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State.
According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against two accused persons, namely, Ramashre Sahni and Mahatam Yadav alleging that on 06.07.2017 the deceased Sudama Nishad was died by drinking wine supplied by these accused.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; there is no independent witness against the applicant; except confessional statement of applicant there is no evidence against the applicant; the co-accused Munna Rajbhar, Vinod Singh and Vikram have already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused who have already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; there is no possibility to get this case decided in short period in future; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 9.8.2017 (more than one year and four months).
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that applicant has no criminal history, the role of this accused is identical to the role of the accused who have already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and the fact that identically placed co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant Ramashre Nishad involved in Case Crime No. 193 of 2017, under Sections 272, 273, 284, 304, 328 I.P.C., P.S. Raunapar, District Azamgarh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant 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 :- 12.12.2018
A. Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering identical co-accused were already enlarged on bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramashre Nishad
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
