Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33088 of 2021 Applicant :- Amar Nath Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Narsingh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Narsingh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Amar Nath, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.59 of 2021, under Section 302, 201 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Gaur, District Basti.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The FIR has been lodged against co-accused Mahesh Yadav. The name of the applicant has surfaced for the first time in the confessional statement of co-accused Mahesh Yadav which is inadmissible in evidence and apart from the said evidence, there is no other credible evidence whatsoever against the applicant to implicate him in the present case. The applicant is not doing any business of land dealing and is not in any manner related to co-accused Mahesh Yadav. There is no eye-witness to the murder. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The links in the chain are conspicuously missing. There is no recovery of any incriminating article either from the possession of the applicant or at his pointing out. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 19 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 07.04.2021.
Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant has been named by the co- accused Mahesh Yadav and as such his implication is there, as such the prayer for bail be rejected.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that it is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is no eye-witness to the murder. The links in the chain are conspicuously missing. The implication of the applicant is on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused to the police.
Looking to 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.
Let the applicant-Amar Nath, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two 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.
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.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 27.9.2021 Gaurav