Allahabad High Court
Raj Krishna vs State Of U.P. on 24 November, 2014
Bench: Manoj Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- BAIL No. - 8450 of 2014
Applicant :- Raj Krishna
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajbaksh Singh,Smt.Kiram Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 9 of 2014, under Sections 147, 148, 302, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kadipur, District Sultanpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that from the prosecution case it appears that there was a sudden fight in respect of flow of the canal water on the fields. Two persons are said to be injured in the incident whereas one person died.
It has been submitted that from the statement of Baijnath (the injured), recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., it appears that the role of the applicant is of beating the injured (Baijnath) whereas the deceased is said to have been caused injury by Raju and Bawandal (non-applicants). It has been submitted that the injuries on the body of Baijnath reveals only simple injuries. It has next been submitted that the applicant is innocent with no criminal history. It has lastly been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 10.01.2014 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Raj Krishna be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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.
Order Date :- 24.11.2014
Anil Shukla/-
