Single judge allowed bail to Shani and Sanjay pending trial in a complaint case involving offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, dismissing contrary submissions of the learned Additional General Advocate.
Accused Shani and Sanjay released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each.
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. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41433 of 2018
Applicant :- Shani And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A. G. A. for the State.
Applicants- Shani and Sanjay have moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 811 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Malpura, District Agra.
I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the F.I.R. and also the bail rejection order.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The further contention is that in the present case there is no eye witness or independent witness who supported the prosecution case; that the informant lodged that N.C.R. against the applicants only to harass them. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 26.09.2018 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. It has been pointed out that applicants are not having any criminal history.
Learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicants.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing
material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicants Shani and Sanjay involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicants shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicants are accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicants are suspected.
v) The applicants shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicants from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 1.5.2019 V.S.Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicants in the present criminal case.
Shani and Sanjay
Ghandikota Sri Devi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
