Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 357 (ALL)

Vineet v. State of U. P.

2024-02-02

DEEPAK VERMA

body2024
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Vinay Saran, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Saurabh Srivastava and Sri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsels for the applicant, Ms. Roshni Dwivedi, holding brief of Sri Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 311 of 2023, registered under Sections 323, 354, 354-B, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Titavi, District Muzaffarnagar during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Story as narrated in the FIR is not plausible. The applicant is brother-in-law of the informant. Informant marriage was solemnized with brother of the applicant in the year 2017 subsequently, who died in the year 2020. Victim had five years old son. Victim has raised dispute for partition of family property on this account, instant FIR has been lodged against the applicant and other family members. Allegation in the FIR as well statement of victim recorded U/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are false and is not supported by any cogent evidence. Injuries of the victim are simple in nature. Prima facie, on perusal of FIR and statement of victim and other evidences, no offence under the alleged sections is made out. Applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. He further submitted that applicant's mother moved complaint before SSP, Muzaffarnagar, before filing of FIR, against the victim. The police after investigation submitted report that applicant's mother in her protection from victim has moved application as victim is raising voice for partition of the property and is claiming share in the property. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.11.2023. 4. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.11.2023. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that victim is handicapped and she has received 11 injuries, which corroborating the facts of the case. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant-Vineet, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified : i. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. iv. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.