Allahabad High Court
Manoj Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 17 October, 2023
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:200486
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44162 of 2023
Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Yadav,Somdatt
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
2. This is the third bail application moved on behalf of the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No. 251 of 2020 under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Bisanda, District Banda.The first Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.19206 of 2022 has been dismissed by Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam vide order dated 29.07.2021 whereas, the second Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2019 of 2022 has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.01.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the second bail application was rejected vide order dated 20.01.2023, however the trial Court was directed to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of one year expedite the trial of the case within a period of one year from the date of production of a copy of this order before it. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to Annexure-3 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application and has argued that the victim is not appearing before the trial Court on account of which, summons have issued against the victim as well as informant of the case. He next submits that the applicant has been in jail for almost three years. Learned counsel next argued that trial is progressing at a slow pace and has relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Indrani Pratim Mukerjea Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1627 of 2022 to submit that prolonged incarceration of a person as an under trial is against his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that there is no occasion now for the applicant to tamper with any witness or to flee from judicial process.Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also 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 and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.12.2020.
4. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but admitted the period of detention of the applicant.
5. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
6. Let the applicant Manoj Kumar Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.
(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
7. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
8. The bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 17.10.2023
S.Ali
