Susheel Tiwari vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Chandra, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri K.K. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The learned Counsel for the applicant pointed out that the coaccused Ashok Tiwari who had opened fire, which did not hit the deceased, was granted bail by this Court whereas the role assigned to the accused applicant is that of exhortation.

The learned Counsel for the applicant on the other hand argued that one Ram Kailash has also lodged an F.I.R. against the accused applicant and three others for the offence under section 308 I.P.C. and if the accused applicant is released on bail, the life of the complainant shall be in danger.

I considered over the matter. Since Ashok Tiwari has already been enlarged on bail, I feel that the accused applicant be also released on bail, of course, by imposing certain conditions.

Let the accusedapplicant Susheel Tiwari, involved in Case Crime No. 495 of 2010 under section 302 I.P.C., and section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned on following conditions that:

The accused shall attend the Court in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him.

He shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused.

He shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer.

He will not temper with the evidence.

The applicant shall not seek any adjournment when the prosecution witnesses are present.

In case any condition is violated the Courts concerned shall inform the High Court so that necessary steps may be taken for the cancellation of the bail.