Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Goldee Alias Lalit challenging his arrest in a murder case. The court allowed bail after hearing counsel and considering the facts, conditions precedent to grant.
Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in like amount to the satisfaction of the court.
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. - 45 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3747 of 2019 Applicant :- Goldee Alias Lalit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brajesh Kumar,Prabhat Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Singh
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by applicant and affidavit filed by first informant in compliance with order dated 25.1.2019, are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is not named in F.I.R. lodged by Rahees Pal Singh against Rajnish, his father Veerpal Singh and four unknown; that as per averments made in F.I.R., Lalit Kumar, son of first informant was fetched by named accused and his associates by their white coloured Scorpio car at about 9:00 a.m. on 9.8.2017 and at 6:30 a.m. on 10.8.2017 P.S. Bibinagar informed first informant that dead body of Lalit is lying in jungles of village Ekledi with Scorpio car in question by its side and when he reached he found blood stained dead body of deceased in jungles of village Ekledi who had been murdered by Rajnish and others; that name of applicant surfaced for the first time in the statement of widow of deceased recorded on 15.8.2017 wherein she narrated altogether a new story of property dealing by deceased with co-accused Rajnish and that at 9:00 p.m. when she called her husband on phone who reported himself to be in Hapur with named accused persons, and applicant and Kailash with regard to negotiations for sale of one house and again when she called him at 11:48 p.m. his voice was disturbed; that recovery of pistol at the pointing of applicant from an open place on 24.8.2017 has been falsely planted of which there is no independent witness; that applicant had no motive to cause death of deceased; that applicant may not be considered to be author of fatal fire arm injury of deceased; that named accused Veerpal Singh has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.11.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.42523 of 2017, copy at Annexure-7; that co-accused Kailash @ Mukhiya with identical role to applicant, has also been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.5.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.47978 of 2017, copy at S.A.-1; that applicant has explained his criminal history in para 7 of supplementary affidavit and since he was falsely implicated in a case under Section 302, 201 I.P.C. he was acquitted vide judgment and order dated 21.4.1999, copy at S.A.-2; that apart from it applicant was also falsely implicated in certain cases under Section 3/4 of Goonda Act and Section 110(G) of Cr.P.C. which have finished due to lapse of time; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 24.8.2017.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that applicant is the real culprit who caused
death of Lalit, the son of first informant; that applicant may not seek parity with co-accused Kailash as no recovery was made from Kailash.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Goldee Alias Lalit be released on bail in Case Crime No.180 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120B I.P.C., P.S. B.B. Nagar, District Bulandshahar, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 5.2.2019 Kpy
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is fit for bail considering the complicity in the offence and the bail granted to co-accused.
Goldee Alias Lalit
Harsh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
