Uttarakhand High Court
Anand Prakash vs State Of Uttarakhand on 9 November, 2016
Author: U.C. Dhyani
Bench: U.C. Dhyani
BA1 No. 684 of 2016 Hon'ble U.C. Dhyani, J.
None Mr. Arvind Vashistha, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Vivek Pathak, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. P.S. Saun, Deputy Advocate General and Ms. Mamta Joshi, Brief Holder for the State.
The applicant-Anand Prakash seeks bail in Case crime No.243 of 2014, under Sections 147/148/149/307/302/120B/109 IPC, Thana Kotwali, Gangnaher Roorkee, District Haridwar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered the grounds taken up in the bail application and perused the documents brought on record.
The present applicant, who is a bandi- rakshak, is in jail since 04.07.2015. The role assigned to the applicant is of conspirator under Section 120B IPC like the co-accused Rakesh Verma, Deputy Jailor, who has already been released on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 26.04.2016. It will be useful to reproduce the observations made in the bail order of co-accused passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court, which is quoted hereinbelow:-
"The facts remains that by now, the charge sheet has been filed and the matter is for framing of the charges before the court concerned. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that there is no chance of the present applicant tampering with the evidence and the role assigned to him is of a conspirator under Section 120B of IPC and the fact that he has already remained in jail for about one year, the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed. It is further made clear that considering the overall gravity of the offence, the applicant shall be released on stringent condition with a security of two persons, from which at least one must be near blood relative of the applicant, out of which at least one should give a high security of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs Only), in addition to the personal bond of the applicant.
It is also made clear that in case the applicant does not appear before the court concerned on the date fixed or seeks unnecessary adjournments in order to dilate the proceedings, the prosecution shall always be at a liberty to approach this Court for cancellation of the bail, which shall be duly considered."
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is ready to furnish reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, if he is granted bail Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant should be granted bail. Bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Anand Prakash be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
If at any point of time, it is found that the applicant is misusing the bail or threatening the prosecution witnesses, the learned Court below shall be at liberty to cancel his bail, in accordance with law.
(U.C. Dhyani, J.) 09.11.2016 Ravi