TURRI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused record. The applicant is involved in Case Crime No.586 of 2006, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Bilgram, District Hardoi. As against the genuineness of the proseuction case and proposed evidence it is submitted that the prosecution story is patently unbelievable. According to the F.I.R. some conversation took place between the deceased and one of the accused who was unknown person. That accused/unknown person has not been arrested till date. It is said that, that unknown person took the deceased with him on the pretext of knowing the way going towards Idgah and that is how the deceased reached on the alleged place of occurrence along with the alleged person. It is submitted that there is no statement on record under Section 161 Cr.P.C. disclosing about that conversation. Then how the first informant who is not an eye witness came to know about that conversation which took place between the deceased and that unknown person who could not be arrested till date. It is submitted that out of the two witnesses mentioned in the F.I.R. one has been got discharged by moving an application on behalf of the complainant who is also a chance witness. Lastly it is said that co-accused Aslam @ Goga having similar allegation against him, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court's order dated 29.01.2009 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.2970 (B) of 2007. He is said to be in jail from November, 2006 i.e. for the last more than two years. There is no criminal history against him. However, the bail is opposed by learned A.G.A. The points pertaining to nature of accusation, danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail, character, behaviour and position of the accused, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and without entering into the merits of the case and particularly having regard to the ground of parity, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Turri) be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.