Veeru v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 51

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30092 of 2019

Applicant :- Veeru Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhash Pandey,Neeraj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 30092 of 2019

This is a bail application moved on behalf of applicant arising out of case crime no. 16 of 2018 u/s 376-D/342/394/506 IPC, P.S. Chaura, District Gorakahpur.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the present case co-accused Bajarangi Harijan has already been enlarged on bail by the another Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.07.2019. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the victim-Pooja Sharma (PW-2) has been examined before the trial Court but she did not support the prosecution case and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the applicant has also pressed the issue of period of detention of the applicant i.e. 15.01.2018, who has undergone more than one year and seven months of incarceration. He, therefore, submits that considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 no useful purpose would be served in keeping the applicant behind the bars. It is next submitted that the applicant does not have any previous criminal history. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail.