High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mukesh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 21577 of 2005  RD-AH 178 (3 January 2006)
Court No. 19
Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 21577 of 2005
Mukesh .....Vs.....State of U.P.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and also perused the material on record.
The applicant Mukesh is involved in case crime No. 45 of 2005, for the offence under Sections 394, 302,412,414, I.P.C, Police Station Bagwala, district Etah.
It is alleged that on 20. 3.2005, while complainant's driver Subhas Chandra Yadav (deceased) had gone to distribute milk on Mahendra Tractor and Trolley No. D.I. 265 U.P. 82D-2725, two unknown persons fired at him and fled away with tractor and trolley. Subhash Chandra Yadav himself gave this information in injured conditions to the police picket party. The case was registered under Section 394, I.P.C. On 23.3.2005 succumbed to his injuries and consequently the case was converted under Section 302 I.P.C. On 21.3.2005 the tractor in question was found abandoned. On 22.3.2005, on receiving information the police intercepted and recovered the trolley in question also from the accused persons. There is no dying declaration.
In the context of genuineness of the prosecution case and the supporting evidence it is argued that he was not named in the F.I.R. It is also pointed out that there was no dying declaration of the deceased although he survived for about three days. It is further argued that the case is based on a weak type of circumstantial evidence. The evidence of last seen consisting of two persons, namely Collector Singh and Rajesh was recorded after about a lapse of one month, that is, on 23.4.2005, which does not inspire confidence and against goes the genuineness of the case
The bail was, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A.
The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and genuineness of the prosecution were duly considered.
In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration some of the arguments advanced on behalf of the applicant in respect of the points discussed herein above, without prejudice to the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.