Criminal magistrate allowed bail to an applicant falsely implicated in a serious offence involving death, noting co-accused were released on bail and no independent evidence existed against him.
Applicant Ranjeet Kumar @ Banti released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
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. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18955 of 2019
Applicant :- Ranjeet Kumar @ Banti Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against two accused persons, namely Abairaj, Vijay Kumar Bind and one unknown person alleging that on 7.9.2018 they looted a truck bearing no. HR47B9993 and assaulted Anil Kumar and Amarchand (driver & cleaner of said truck), they received injuries. Anil Kumar was died resultantly. During investigation, the names of named accused persons were exonerated. Accused Ranjit Kumar @ Banti, Satish, Brajendra Yadav, Anjesh Kumar @ Annu, Anil Kumar and Syamveer Singh were arrested in police encounter case and some case money, countrymade pistols, cartridges and mobile were recovered. They confessed the said offence.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Satish, Anil Kumar and Brajendra Yadav have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 5.4.2019, 17.4.2019 and 30.4.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 14222 of 2019, 15866 of 2019 and 18158 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. During investigation, the name of applicant was surfaced. Recovery was falsely planted by the police to show his good work. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant except the confessional statement of applicant and co-accused. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 15.9.2018 (near about seven and half month) having no previous criminal history, some cases were roped after this incident 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 Satish, Anil Kumar and Brajendra Yadav who have 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 Ranjeet Kumar @ Banti involved in Case Crime No. 175 of 2018, under Sections 364, 341, 201, 396, 397, 412 IPC & Section 10/12 D.D.A. Act, Police Station Chaubiya, District Etawah 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 :- 6.5.2019 A. Singh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail given the release of co-accused and lack of independent evidence against him.
Whether the police recovery of evidence constitutes false planting warranting bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ranjeet Kumar @ Banti
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
