Raj Kumar vs State Of U.P.
2019 Latest Caselaw 3394 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 51
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39698 of 2018
 

 
Applicant :- Raj Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Neta Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.

This is second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.455 of 2016, under Sections498A,304B,201 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act,P.S. Sasani District Hathras.

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order of this Court dated 12.5.2017 passed in Crl. misc. bail application no. 7493 of 2017.

I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the F.I.R. and also the first bail rejection order by this Court.

The present second bail application is being pressed with the contention that subsequent to the rejection of the first Bail application, the P.W.1, Kewal Singh, father of the victim, P.W. 2, Kuwarsen, P.W.3, Raj Kumar, brother of the victim, P.W.4, Shankar Lal, Uncle of the victim have been examined and they have been declared hostile. In view of these subsequent development, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The applicant is in jail since 26.10.2016.

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicant but he has not disputed the fact that aforesaid witnesses have been declared hostile subsequently after rejection of the first bail application.

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

Let the applicant Raj Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.

v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the learned counsel for the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.