Allahabad High Court
Kamlesh vs State Of U.P. on 13 March, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10837 of 2019
Applicant :- Kamlesh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Sri Abhishek Srivastava and Sri Vishal Shukla, learned counsel jointly filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the 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 against 5 persons including the applicant. The axe has been shown in the hands of the applicant but at the time of medical examination no incised wound has been found to the injured Nirmala Devi. Two lacerated wounds, one tender contused swelling, one tender swelling and injury no. 5 complain of pain has been found on the person of injured. It has further been submitted that the applicant is Jeth of the informant/injured. There is dispute of property in between the applicant and informant/injured due to which the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is general allegation against the applicant. No specific role has been assigned to him. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 23 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 26.10.2018.
Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that prior to this incident the applicant has committed rape upon the informant and the informant has lodged FIR against the applicant. Only to make pressure the applicant and other co-accused have committed marpit with the injured/informant. Fracture of right 10th rib has been found to the injured and a Calcified Dot Lesion in left parietal region has also been shown. The applicant has committed the alleged offence, 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 Kamlesh involved in Case Crime No. 71 of 2018, under section 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Hussainganj, District Fatehpur 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 :- 13.3.2019
Masarrat
