Allahabad High Court
Rajendra Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 19 October, 2016
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35139 of 2016
Applicant :- Rajendra Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 402 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 304-B and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station ? Islamnagar, District ? Badaun, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the co-accused ? Smt. Jashoda Devi (deceased's mother-in-law) has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 05.10.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34731 of 2016 ? (Smt. Jashoda Devi ? State of U.P), copy of the order is taken on record. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Smt. Jashoda Devi who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned AGA. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter has not been disputed by him.
It has further been submitted that the applicant is innocent with no previous criminal history and is in jail since 27.06.2016 and, in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned AGA, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.
Let the applicant ? Rajendra Yadav 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
ii. 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.
iii. The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
iv. 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.
v. 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 :- 19.10.2016.
Vinod.
