Allahabad High Court
Prashant Rana vs State Of U.P. on 24 April, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5085 of 2019
Applicant :- Prashant Rana
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vikrant Rana
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikrant Rana, 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 by Smt. Rajendri Devi, wife of the deceased on 24.8.2018 at 9:35 hours against the applicant mentioning therein that the applicant has borrowed Rs. 3 lacs from the deceased. The applicant has not returned the money to the deceased and on 23.8.2018 at about 8:00 P.M. the applicant took away the husband of the informant on the pretext to return the money. The applicant was arrested on 24.8.2018 and a bullet motorcycle of deceased, one empty cartridge of 315 bore and one white T-shirt with blood stain was recovered on the pointing out of the applicant. The dead body of the deceased was recovered from a canal on 28.8.2018. According to postmortem report 3 incised wounds were found on the body of the deceased and cause of death of the deceased has been shown asphyxia as a result of ante mortem drowning. As per postmortem report no gun shot injury has been found on the body of the deceased. In postmortem report the time of death has been shown about 3 days which shows that the deceased died on 25.8.2018. The applicant was arrested on 24.8.2018, therefore, there was no occasion to the applicant to commit the murder of the deceased. It has further been submitted that applicant has not taken away the deceased. False recovery of motorcycle and T-shirt has been planted against the applicant. There is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of suspicion. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 24.8.2018.
Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant is named in the FIR. In FIR it has been mentioned that applicant took away the deceased forcibly on his motorcycle, thereafter, the dead body of the deceased was found in canal on 28.8.2018. After cremation of the deceased one bullet was recovered from the Ash which shows that the gun shot injury was caused to the deceased. The applicant had borrowed money from the deceased. Due to dispute of money the applicant has committed the murder of the deceased, therefore, he 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 Prashant Rana involved in Case Crime No. 245 of 2018, under section 364, 506, 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Ganganagar, District Meerut 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 :- 24.4.2019
Masarrat
