Allahabad High Court
Krishna Kumar @ Krishna vs State Of U.P. on 25 October, 2016
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35097 of 2016
Applicant :- Krishna Kumar @ Krishna
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Surat Saroj,Ali Hasan,Istiyaq Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 582 of 2013, under Sections 323, 504, 304 I.P.C, Police Station ? Maharajganj, District ? Jaunpur, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
It is contented by learned counsel for applicant that the applicant is in jail since 19.07.2013. It is contended that initially a non-cognizable report had been lodged in the matter, in which general allegation were made. Subsequently, upon the death of victim also, a report was given, in which no specific role was assigned and it is only after a week of the incident that specific role was assigned to the applicant. It is also stated that even the injury report and postmortem report are inconsistent. It is also stated that co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail.
It is lastly contended that applicant is innocent with no previous criminal history and, in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A 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 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 ? Krishna Kumar alias 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 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 :- 25.10.2016.
Vinod.
