1. Heard Sri Pradeep Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manav Chaurasia, learned AGA for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 58 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Bilariyarganj, District Azamgarh during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application has been dismissed by this Court after considering the CDR of the applicant and co-accused Rubina Bharti but after rejection of first bail application of the applicant, co-accused Rubina Bharti has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.01.2024 and her bail order has been annexed at page-55 of the paper-book. He further submits, on facts case of applicant is at par with her.
4. He further submits, it is case of circumstantial evidence and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 07.02.2023 i.e. for almost two years.
5. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed after considering the entire facts of the case but could not dispute the fact that after rejection of first bail application of the applicant, coaccused Rubina Bharti has been released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court with a reasoned order and on facts case of applicant is at par with her.
6. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and it is case of circumstantial evidence and in the present matter he is in jail since 07.02.2023 i.e. for almost two years
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
8. However, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court on merit vide order dated 18.07.2023 but it reflects that after rejection of first bail application of the applicant, bail application of co-accused Rubina Bharti has been allowed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court with a very detailed and reasoned order and on facts case of applicant is at par with her.
9. Further, it is case of circumstantial evidence and applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 07.02.2023 i.e. for almost two years.
10. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
11. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
12. Let the applicant - Ravindra Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
14. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
