Allahabad High Court
Junaid And Anr. vs State Of U.P. on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 29
Case :- BAIL No. - 6382 of 2019
Applicant :- Junaid And Anr.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary,Dilip Kumar Chaudhary
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Y.S.Srivasta
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
It is contended on behalf of the applicants that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. It is further contended that Co-accused Shakeel has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 3.7.2019 by this Court passed in Bail Application No.6319 of 2019. It is also contended that injuries received are on non vital parts and applicants have been assigned the role of exhortation only. It is next contended that fire arm injury has been caused by other accused persons and not by the applicants. The applicants are in jail since 18.06.2019.
It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants.
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 for the period for which they are in jail, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicants Junaid and Lateef involved in Case Crime No.103 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307 IPC., Police Station-Motiganj, District- Gonda 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii). The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure them 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 them in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
P.s.
