Allahabad High Court
Lal Bihari Maurya vs State Of U.P. on 2 April, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11993 of 2019
Applicant :- Lal Bihari Maurya
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dewarshi Kumar Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Singh
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of complainant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR of the alleged incident was lodged under section 279 and 304-A IPC against unknown. The FIR was lodged by Rajesh Maurya, brother of deceased who was not present with the deceased at the time of alleged incident. His mother-in-law Smt. Radhika Devi was present with the deceased. The name of applicant came into light in the statement of Smt. Radhika Devi. In her statement she has stated that applicant, co-accused Prabhu Narayan Chauhan and others have thrown the deceased in river Ganga. Except the witness Smt. Radhika Devi there is no other eye witness of the alleged occurrence. The FIR of the alleged incident was lodged on the information of Smt. Radhika Devi by the informant but at the time of lodging of the FIR Smt. Radhika Devi has not disclosed this fact that the applicant has thrown the deceased in Ganga river. It has further been submitted that in postmortem report the cause of death has been shown asphyxia as a result of drowning. No injury has been found on the body of the deceased. There is dispute of property in between the applicant and Smt. Radhika Devi due to which the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. In fact, the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. He has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 5.2.2019.
Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the name of applicant came into light in the statement of Smt. Radhika Devi who is eye witness of the alleged incident. In her statement it has come that the applicant and other co-accused have thrown the deceased in Ganga river due to which the deceased died, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Lal Bihari Maurya involved in Case Crime No. 772 of 2017, under section 304 IPC, P.S. Chaubepur, District Varanasi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. He shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.
3. He shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 2.4.2019
Masarrat
