Allahabad High Court
Kaluaa vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 May, 2022
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7122 of 2021
Applicant :- Kaluaa
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shekhar Gangal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Shekhar Gangal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State and perused the record.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Kaluaa, with a prayer to release him on bail in Special Case No.2824 of 2020 (State of U.P. Vs. Kaluaa and others) and charge sheet dated 19.8.2020 arising out of Case Crime No.257 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 354(B), 504, 506 I.P.C., 3(2)a of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station- Khair, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that it is a cross case in which both sides have received injuries and at this stage it cannot be said as to who was aggressors and the incident had taken place at the spur of the moment. It is further contended that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. The applicant has no criminal history.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. That the applicant 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;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
6. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 13.5.2022
Dev/-
