The Court allowed bail to the applicants accused of offences under sections 147, 148, 325, and 304 IPC in a collective affray resulting in death, identifying them as fit cases for bail despite the gravity of the charges.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each under specified 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. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13681 of 2019
Applicant :- Hakim And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shravan Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri Mayank Mishra, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against seven accused persons, namely Sri Krishn, Vikram Singh, Pawan Singh, Chetan Singh, Gopi, Hakim and Harivansh alleging that on 27.11.2018 at 6.15. p.m. they assaulted Sunita, Heera Singh with lathi-danda and iron rod. Sunita received injuries on head, resultantly died.Specific role of assault was assigned to co-accused Vikram Singh and blood stained stick (danda) was also recovered on the pointing out of co-accused Vikram Singh.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. There are general allegations against all accused persons except co-accused Vikram Singh. Main role of assault was assigned to coaccused Vikram Singh. Offences levelled against the applicants are not attracted in the present case. The case of applicant is distinguishable from case of co-accused Vikram Singh. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicants. They are languishing in jail since 28.11.2018 (near about four and half months) having no criminal history and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicants and admitted that applicants have no criminal history.
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 applicants Hakim and Haribansh involved in Case Crime No. 465 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 325, 304 IPC, Police Station Refinary Mathura, District Mathura 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 applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
5.The applicants 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 them 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 :- 10.4.2019 A. Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants are eligible for bail in a case involving collective affray and murder.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hakim
Haribansh
State Of U.P.
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
