Allahabad High Court
Vinay Singh vs State Of U.P. on 26 May, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18161 of 2015
Applicant :- Vinay Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manmohan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Manmohan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was not named in the FIR as the same was lodged against two co-accused Nand Lal and Kangres. He further submits that that name of the applicant has come into light for the first time in the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P..C. along with co-accused Nand Lal and Kangs against whom allegation of rape has been levelled, who have already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide orders dated 19.1.2015 and 11.3.2015 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.1056 of 2015 and 8296 of 2015, copies of which have been annexed at pages-61 to 64 of the bail application, and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 11.10.2014.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
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 applicant-Vinay Singh involved in Case Crime No. 36 of 2014, under Sections 376(D), 504, 506, 392 I.P.C. and 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station-Karama, District Sonbhadra be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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 :- 26.5.2015
NS
