Allahabad High Court
Rakesh vs State Of U.P. on 17 March, 2021
Author: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33678 of 2020 Applicant :- Rakesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Farid Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Babu Dubey with Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36035 of 2020 Applicant :- Naresh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Farid Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Babu Dubey Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Both bail applications arising out of same case crime thus they are being disposed of by a common order.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been given by the accused applicants Rakesh and Naresh in Case Crime No. 154 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Sardhana, District Meerut.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the accused applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. FIR version is that on the fateful date and time accused persons with lathi danda and sharp weapons in their hands committed Marpeet with the deceased, who sustained injuries and subsequently died in the hospital. Submission is that all accused persons related each other and they have been framed in the case by imputing general allegation. FIR itself discloses that deceased was having illicit relation with wife of accused Naresh and also on the said date accused persons found the deceased with wife of Naresh whereupon they committed Marpeet and in that process deceased fell down from roof and after sustaining injury he died. It is submitted that keeping in mind illicit relationship it should also be considered that incident must have been took place out of grave and sudden provocation. It has been submitted that the deceased is said to have sustained 13 injuries and one of the injury has been shown to have been caused by sharp weapon. There is no mention anywhere by what sharp weapon Marpeet was committed by the accused persons and who was keeping with him alleged sharp weapon and caused injuries. It is submitted that on pointing of accused Naresh Danda has been recovered. Further submission is that there is no criminal history of the accused applicants and charge-sheet has already been filed after police investigation and applicants are prepared to furnish sureties and bonds, therefore, there is no possibility of their either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence. Applicants are languishing in jail since 15.4.2020 and undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that in the incident deceased has sustained 13 injuries and bail application of one of the accused Bittu has been rejected by the coordinate Bench of this Court. Further submission is that considering the nature of injuries caused to the deceased, accused applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. There is also eye witness account and even wife of accused Naresh has also supported FIR version by saying that accused persons were committing Maarpeet, therefore, it has been requested that in this kind of case no lenient view should be taken and bail application should be rejected.
Having heard the submission of learned counsel of both sides, considering the fact that the deceased was having illicit relation with wife of one of the accused and on the fateful day he was found with wife of the accused Naresh whereupon being provoked accused persons committed Marpeet and in that process deceased fell down from roof, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering that all accused persons have been named in the FIR by way of general allegation and there is no specific description of sharp weapon used for commission of offence and as such without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Let applicants be released on bail in aforesaid case crime on their 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 applicants 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 they are 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 applicants will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants 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 applicants to prison.
Order Date :- 17.3.2021 Dhirendra/