Allahabad High Court
Raju vs State Of U.P. on 25 March, 2021
Bench: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 28
Case :- BAIL No. - 3765 of 2021
Applicant :- Raju
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sadhu Saran Shukla,Madhu Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.
The case is called out.
Heard learned counsel for the bail-applicant Sri Sadhu Saran Shukla, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State Sri Vijay Prakash Srivastav, Advocate and perused the record.
The present bail application is filed on behalf of the accused-applicant-Raju, who is involved in offence under Section 379/411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda. The memo of the application for bail alongwith supporting affidavit is lacking the correct information of case crime number, whereupon the aforesaid offence is registered, it is simply written as case crime no.0310. However, on perusal of rejection order dated 05.01.2021, annexure no.3, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gonda, it is revealed that the accused-applicant-Raju is involved in Case Crime No.310/2020, under Sections 379/411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda.
Learned A.G.A. is present to protest the bail-application, to whom the instructions are received and confirms that the present accused-applicant is involved in Case Crime No.310/2020, under Sections 379/411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda, as such, the bail-application is being entertained.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant reading over the first information report dated 09.08.2020 lodged against some unknown persons, who stole sometime in the morning on 09.08.2020 at about 04:00 A.M., when a motor cycle bearing no.UP-51 AN 7954 was found missing. Subsequently, the recovery of motor cycle pursuant to the F.I.R. dated 09.08.2020 is shown by the police to be made from the present accused-applicant. In confessional statement, the present accused-applicant accepted the offence and also stated that he is in profession of such an illegal activities.
However, the stolen article is recovered, offence under Section 379 read with Section 411 I.P.C. is arraigned upon the accused-applicant and charge sheet is submitted in the trial Court, learned counsel submitted that all these are false allegations and the present accused-applicant has no criminal history, he is a common man and he is ready and willing to face the trial so as to put his defence properly.
Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposes 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 him 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 (Raju), involved in Case Crime No.310/2020, under Sections 379/411 of I.P.C., registered at Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- 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 applicants 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 :- 25.3.2021
Saurabh
