Allahabad High Court
Dharam Veer vs State Of U.P. on 6 March, 2019
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4298 of 2019
Applicant :- Dharam Veer
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Onkar Nath
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Onkar Nath, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.
This is the 2nd bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 9.11.2017 with a direction to the trial court to expedite and conclude the trial of the applicant within 6 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, but more than one year has since been elapsed the trial has not been concluded.
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 old enmity and village party bandi and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that the main role has been attributed to co-accused Shyam Veer. The applicant has been assigned only the role of causing injury to the injured in his hand by firm arm. According to the doctor opinion the injuries no.1 & 2 may be possible with one firm arm. Thus, the injury report does not corroborate the prosecution version, which clearly indicates that the prosecution story is doubtful. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent and he is still in jail since 4.1.2017.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also period ofdetention, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Dharam Veer involved in Case Crime No.147 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148,149, 307, 323, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Nidhauli Kala, District Etah be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same, preferably within a period of further six months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 6.3.2019
IA
