Court No. - 53

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42871

of 2020

Applicant :- Ajay Yadav

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Nath Yadav,Akhilesh

Kumar Yadav,Swati Agrawal Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghuraj Singh,Vishal

Kumar

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Heard Sushri Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the

applicant, Shri Vishal Kumar, learned counsel for the informant

as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the

applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the

present case. He has not committed the present offence. No

prima facie case is made out against the applicant. If entire

prosecution case is taken into consideration then also it is a case

of circumstantial evidence. Incident is said to have taken place

on 02.09.2020 whereas F.I.R. was lodged on 09.09.2020

without any plausible explanation regarding the delay.

Referring to the inquest report, it is further submitted that

informant is the witness of the inquest. Cause of death is shown

as accident in it. It is further submitted that after a gap of many

days brother of the deceased disclosed that deceased was taken

by the applicant from his house before him. Referring to the

statement of the brother of the deceased, it is further submitted

that if he was aware about this fact from the very beginning,

same would have come in the F.I.R. itself. It is further

submitted that cause of death of the deceased is drowning.

There is no direct evidence against the applicant to connect him

with the present matter. Learned counsel for the applicant also

referred to the statement of last seen witnesses and further

argued that their statement is based on advise after a gap of

about 32 days. Thus, referring to the entire facts mentioned in

the affidavit as well as in the documents annexed with the bail

application, it is further submitted that applicant is languishing

in jail since 18.09.2020 having no criminal history. In case

applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of

bail and will cooperate in trial.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as

learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and further argued that

although nothing has been mentioned in the inquest report or in

the F.I.R. yet informant and his son have made clear that

deceased was taken by the applicant from his house, thereafter

dead body of the deceased was received. There is last seen

evidence. Witnesses had seen the applicant and deceased

together at the place of occurrence where dead body was lying.

A prima facie case is made out against the applicant.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,

submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in

view the nature of offence, complicity of accused, scrutinizing

the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., statement of witnesses

recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and without expressing any

opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that

the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application

is allowed.

Let the applicant Ajay Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 0149

of 2020, under Sections 304 IPC, P.S. Deedarganj, District -

Azamgarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond

and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following

conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties

be verified.

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the

trial.

2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution

witness.

3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date

fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the

offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission

of which he is suspected.