Allahabad High Court
Sanjay Kumar Patel vs State Of U.P. on 23 May, 2018
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19309 of 2018
Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Patel
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Sri R.B.Yadav,Advocate, has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri A.K.Mishra,learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.B.Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri G.P.Singh, 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 is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village parti-bandi. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Guddan Patel and Sonu have been granted bail by the learned Single Judge as well as by this Court vide orders dated 24.1.2018 and 13.4.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 50899 of 2017 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.13615 of 2018, copies of which are annexed as Annexure-14 (at pages-80-83) to the bail application, the case of the applicant stands of identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 24.4.2018.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
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 applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Sanjay Kumar Patel involved in Special Case No.2 of 2012 (Yogendra Vs. Ashiwini Patel and Others), under Sections 8, 9 & 13 of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Ghughali, District Maharajganj 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 :- 23.5.2018/NS
