Allahabad High Court
Sanju vs State Of U.P. on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26973 of 2019
Applicant :- Sanju
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Om Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Sanju with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 332 of 2015, under Sections 323, 308, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Kampil, District-Farrukhabad, during the pendency of the trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. lodged on 20.10.2015 with respect to an incident occurred at 11.45 p.m. on 19.10.2015 with the allegation that unknown person have brutally beaten the injured with sharp edge weapon and danda. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that medical report also does not corroborate with the prosecution version. His complicity came into light in the statement of injured which was recorded after one month of the alleged incident. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further contended that the co-accused, namely, Rajendra Singh and Nahar Singh have already been enlarged on bail by the another Benches of this Court vide orders dated 28th November, 2016 and 31st July, 2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 41388 of 2016 and 42354 of 2016 have already been enlarged on bail. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 21st May, 2018. As such the present applicant has undergone more than one year of incarceration.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
Sushil/-
