Allahabad High Court
Mast Ram Yadav And Another vs The State Of U.P. on 30 April, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- BAIL No. - 8631 of 2014
Applicant :- Mast Ram Yadav And Another
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Shaidenra Shukla holding brief of Sri Ashish Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Aloo Mohan Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the co-accused Het Ram and Badlu from whom certain recoveries were made, have been granted bail by another Bench of this Court on 7.4.2015 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2033 of 2015. So far as the applicants are concerned no incriminating article has been recovered either from their possession or on their pointing, hence the case of the applicants stands on much better footing, therefore, the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicants are in jail since 1.7.2014.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Bail orders of aforesaid co-accused have been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant. The same is taken on record.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicants Mast Ram and Murli Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 1100 of 2014 under Section 302 I.P.C., police station Nawabganj, District Bahraich be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following condition:-
(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 30.4.2015
shiraz
