Pankaj Vishwakarma vs State Of U.P.
2012 Latest Caselaw 1448 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 47
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 121 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Pankaj Vishwakarma
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Hridai Narayan Sharma,P.C.Srivastava,Ramanuj Yadav,Udai Pratap Singh
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate,V.N.Upadhyay
 

 
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that no one has seen the incident dated  19.09.2011 in which deceased Laxmikant was shot dead.  The applicant was neither named in the First Information Report nor in the first statement of the  informant.  Subsequently, in the second statement of informant recorded on 11.10.2011, the name of the applicant was disclosed. Thereafter witnesses were introduced. The statement of witnesses were recorded on 20.11.2011. Witness Nandlal in his first statement has not named the applicant subsequently on 20.11.2011 in his second statement, he named the applicant.  These circumstances clearly shows that the applicant was falsely implicated in the present case.  He has no previous criminal history hence he is entitled for bail.  He is in jail since 31.10.2011.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in view of the statement of witnesses, the applicant was involved in the present case hence he is not entitled for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merit, it is a fit case for bail.  Let the applicant Pankaj Vishwakarma be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No.604 of 2011, under section 302 I.P.C and 3/25/27 Arms Act, P.S. Rampur, District-Jaunpur with the following conditions:

1) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

2) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate the prosecution witness.

3) The applicant will appear before the court concerned on the date fixed unless personal appearance is exempted.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and to take the applicant into custody.

Order Date :- 8.5.2012

N Tiwari