Allahabad High Court
Bal Krishan vs State Of U.P. on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189986
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41494 of 2023
Applicant :- Bal Krishan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This is second bail application. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by a coordinate bench of this court on 08.03.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after rejection of the bail application of the applicant eight prosecution witnesses including the witnesses of fact have been examined. Applicant was not named in the first information report. Specific role has been assigned to the named accused in the first information report. Applicant has been implicated in this case because he is father of the one of the co-accused with whom deceased is alleged to have gone. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the dead body of the deceased was recovered in a box after two days. Doctor conducted post mortem of the dead body recovered and found it to be 22-24 years. However, the deceased was aged about 40 years as per allegation made in the first information report. Learned counsel for the submits that the dead body recovered was not of the deceased involved in this case but it was of some other woman. There is no possibility of tampering the witnesses of fact. Applicant is in jail since 30.07.2021
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Bal Krishan, involved in Case Crime No.333 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 34, 120-B I.P.C, Police Station Express Way, District- Gautam Budh Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 applicants fail 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.
(v) 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 complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of six months.
Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial court concerned within ten days.
Order Date :- 4.10.2023
SS
