Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52930 of 2021 Applicant :- Abhishek Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 201 of 2021, under Section 3(1) of UP Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Khajani, District Gorakhpur.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that only one case has been shown against the accused- applicant in the gang chart, in which the applicants are on bail. Copy of bail order has been annexed as Annexure No. 2 to the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 15.6.2021.
It is further submitted that similarly placed co accused Abhishek @ Tisu Paswan and Rinku Yadav and Pintu Yadav have already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2021 and 22.11.2021 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application Nos. 38868 of 2021 and 41475 of 2021, therefore the applicants are also entitled to be released on bail by this Court on the ground of parity.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail. He submits that the investigation is now complete and the charge sheet has been filed.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicants- Abhishek Yadav and Ajay Yadav, who are involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on each of them 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.
(ii) The applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.
(iv) The applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicants.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 24.12.2021/RavindraKSingh