Allahabad High Court
Prahlad Yadav And Anr. vs State Of U.P. on 24 October, 2016
Bench: Ranjana Pandya
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 13
Case :- BAIL No. - 8597 of 2016
Applicant :- Prahlad Yadav And Anr.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Nijam Ahamad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Mrs. Ranjana Pandya,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today ist aken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been submitted on behalf of the applicants that the applicants are in jail since 5.3.2016. The occurrence is said to have been taken place on 3.3.2016. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. The false recovery of electronic balance has shown from the applicant, which recovery does not have any independent witness. The matter is triable by Magistrate-I class, hence the applicants are entitled to bail.
Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicants are languishing in jail since 5.3.2016 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned AGA 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 tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let applicants Prahlad Yadav and Arjun Chauhan involved in Case Crime No. 52 of 2016 under Sections 380 and 411 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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 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 applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him, 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 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 them in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.10.2016
kanhaiya
