Allahabad High Court
Shree Keshan @ Shree Krishana vs State Of U.P. on 15 July, 2021
Bench: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No. - 29
Case :- BAIL No. - 201 of 2021
Applicant :- Shree Keshan @ Shree Krishana
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.
The case is called out.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant Sri Raj Kumar Verma, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Prem Prakash, Advocate are physically present in the Court.
The present bail application is filed on behalf of the accused-applicant, Shree Keshan @ Shree Krishana, who is involved in Case Crime No.228/2020, under Sections 392, 411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station- Maholi, District- Sitapur.
The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of bail plea of applicant by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 12, Sitapur vide order dated 3.11.2020.
Reading over the F.I.R., learned counsel for the applicant argued that F.I.R. was lodged on 19.6.2020 by the complainant alleging that on 19.6.2020 at about 11:30 a.m. he went to Allahabad Bank, Mahali for withdrawing money of Rs.72,000/-. It is further alleged that when the complainant was on his way, two persons on a motor bike intercepted him near Barshaiya brick, made a fire on him and took away his bag alongwith them.
In the above context, learned counsel for the bail applicant argued that the F.I.R. has been lodged due to malafide intention, accused-applicant is not named in the F.I.R., the informant did not receive any injury over his person, there is no eye witness of the alleged incident and the present case is triable by the Magistrate.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant further submitted that the accused-applicant is a common man, local resident, not in a position to flee away from the process of the Court, a law abiding person, is ready and willing to participate in the trial and will abide himself from the conditions imposed on him for grant of bail. Learned counsel further submitted that the accused-applicant is innocent and for no fault of him, he is languishing in jail since 20.06.2020.
Learned A.G.A vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail but did not dispute the contentions made by learned counsel for the bail-applicant.
Keeping into mind the valuable right of personal liberty and the fundamental principle not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence as, held in the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the bail-applicant to enlarge them on bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record, considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking into the complicity of the applicant-accused in the offence, the gravity of offence, severity of punishment without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant (Shree Keshan @ Shree Krishana), involved in Case Crime No.228/2020, under Sections 392, 411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station- Maholi, District- Sitapur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- 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 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 misuse 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 :- 15.7.2021
Gaurav/-
