Uttarakhand High Court
Order On Bail Application Of The Accused vs State Of Uttarakhand on 26 September, 2018
Author: Sharad Kumar Sharma
Bench: Sharad Kumar Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Original Jurisdiction
st
1 Bail Application No.1080 of 2018
Order on bail application of the accused
Bharat Airi S/o Deewan Airi ... Applicant (in jail)
Vs
State of Uttarakhand ... Opp. Party
With
st
1 Bail Application No.1073 of 2018
Vikik Samant @ Vickey Samant
S/o Bharat Samant ... Applicant (in jail)
Vs
State of Uttarakhand ... Opp. Party
With
st
1 Bail Application No.1074 of 2018
Manish Airi S/o Pushkar Airi ... Applicant (in jail)
Vs
State of Uttarakhand ... Opp. Party
With
st
1 Bail Application No.1081 of 2018
Manish Airi S/o Raju Airi ... Applicant (in jail)
Vs
State of Uttarakhand ... Opp. Party
===============================================
Mr. R.S. Sammal, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. J.S. Virk, A.G.A. with Mrs. Meena Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of
Uttarakahnd.
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
These are four Bail Applications seeking regular bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 86 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 354, 323, 504, 506, 302 and 34 I.P.C., Police Station Jhankaiya, District Udham Singh Nagar.
2. There chanced an incident on 27th November, 2017 at about 9:30 p.m., wherein, the accused, herein, are said to be equipped with lathi, danda and sharpe- edged weapons had assaulted Rohit, nephew of complainant, Radhika of the F.I.R. No. 86 of 2017, 2 registered under Sections 147, 148, 307, 354, 323 and 149 I.P.C., Police Station Jhankaiya, District Udham Singh Nagar. Prior to F.I.R. No. 86 of 2017, for the same incident, there was non-cognizable report which was lodged on 28th November, 2017 at 10:50 a.m. by one Jyoti Sharma W/o Kailash Sharma, which was numbered as FIR No. 18 of 2017, alleging therein that accused Manish Airi S/o Kripal had misbehaved with her. At present stage, we are concerned with accused Manish Airi S/o Kripal, whose bail application has already been rejected by this Court.
3. In the First Information Report which was filed on 29.11.2017, which was registered as Case Crime No. 86 of 2017, the present applicants to the Bail Applications are shown to be co-accused for the incident of 27th November, 2017, which has resulted into the death of Rohit Sharma, on account of injuries, which have been inflicted by the accused person. All these accused persons have been arrested and the Session Trial, being Session Trial No. 66 of 2018, is pending consideration before the Court of Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar.
4. One of the co-accused, Kamal @ K.D. S/o Prem Singh Dhami, resident of Village Chaudapani, Lohiahead Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar has been granted bail by this Court on 30th May, 2018. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while considering the Bail Application No. 883 of 2018, had recorded the following reasonings for granting the bail :-
"Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant crime; has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 02.12.2017. He submitted 3 that P.W.1 has been declared hostile, inasmuch as, she has not supported the prosecution story. He submitted that the applicant is the only bread earner in the family and, due to his detention, his entire family is at the verge of starvation. He stated that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the same and will furnish the bail surety as per the satisfaction of this Court.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail at this stage. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Kamal @ K.D., be released on bail, on executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned."
5. Apart from the aforesaid facts, which were considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 30th May, 2018 for granting bail to Kamal @ K.D., even on perusal of the F.I.R., it is revealed that there is no specific role assigned to the accused applicants, herein, whose bail applications are being considered by this Court
6. Since the role of the present applicants, being identical to Kamal @ K.D., the applicants too are entitled to be enlarged on bail on the same terms and conditions as has been imposed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in granting bail to Kamal @ K.D. on 30th May, 2018 in Bail Application No. 883 of 2018.
7. It will not be out of context to refer that when the present Bail Applications came up for consideration before the Court on 13th September, 2018. During the course of the argument, attention was drawn of this 4 court to the affidavit dated 11th June, 2018, filed by the second complainant, i.e. Radhika W/o Hari Shanka, the complainant of the F.I.R. No. 86 of 2017, wherein, she has submitted that Kamal @ K.D., after being released on bail on 30th May, 2018, his father and other relatives, entered into the house of Radhika and have threatened her, forced her not to appear as witness and to declare herself as hostile. In the affidavit, in paragraph no. 6, she has made the following pleading:-
"6. That on 30.05.2018, when this Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant bail to one of the accused namely Kamal @ K.D., in the evening Kamal's father, Sunder Airi, the brother of Co-accused Bharat Airi and Bharat Samant entered into the house of the complainant and threatened the complainant as well as his family members with dire consequences and pressurized her and her family for compromise by declaring herself as hostile, and the complainant who has already lost her nephew, cannot hostile herself under the pressure of the accused persons and their relatives."
8. Considering the said averment, this Court had called the Investigating Officer to appear in person, order dated 13.09.2018 reads as under :-
"Let Investigating Officer be present along with the entire record before this Court on the next date of listing."
In compliance of the order passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court on 13th September, 2018, the Investigating Officer, Mr. Prabhat Kumar is present in person before this Court. He informs that the trial has reached at the advanced stage and eight witnesses of 5 facts have already been examined and now the Trial Court has been fixed 10th October, 2018.
9. Besides granting the bail to the four accused person, all the accused persons as well as Kamal @ K.D. are hereby warned by this Court that they will not at all ever interfere in any action of the complainant Radhika or any witness participating in the trial by extending any threat or obstructing their appearance as witness as apprehended by Radhika in her affidavit. It is further made clear that if the accused applicants threaten and obstruct the witnesses from their appearance before the Court as witness, bail granted by this Court today would automatically stands rejected.
10. It is further directed that the Investigating Officer, who is present before this Court, would ensure that on each date fixed by the Trial Court, he would provide protection to Radhika, the complainant of the F.I.R. No. 86 of 2017 and would escort her from residence to the Trial Court and back to her home.
11. Since the accused applicants in the F.I.R. have been assigned with the same role as that of co-accused Kamal @ K.D., who had already been granted bail by the order dated 30th May, 2018 in First Bail Application No. 883 of 2018, the accused-applicants, too, are released on bail on the same terms and conditions as co-accused Kamal @ K.D in Bail Application No. 883 of 2018, i.e. on executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
12. Subject to the above observations, the Bail Applications are disposed of.
613. Personal appearance of the Investigating Officer is exempted until and unless it is required by this Court.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 26.09.2018 Shiv