Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41243 of 2021 Applicant :- Amarawati Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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. 584 of 2019, under Sections 406,420 IPC, P.S. Rohaniya, District Varanasi.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicant had executed sale deeds of the property in question of his own share in favour of the informant on 10.6.2015 and 4.2.2016 but the mutation could not taken place. The informant is said to have moved an application under Section156(3) Cr.P.C. before the court below against the applicant and his sons whereupon the present FIR has been lodged against the applicant and others. It is contended that applicant was joint owner of the property in question i.e. Aarazi No. 31 and 540 and his name was also mentioned in the Khatauni. It is further submitted that the FIR had been lodged after four years without there being any plausible explanation. It is further submitted that the matters relates to civil dispute but has been given colour of criminal nature just to harass the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 1.09.2021 and has no criminal history.
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 applicant- Amarawati Devi, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) 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 IPC.
(iv) 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.
(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 applicant.
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 :- 21.12.2021/RavindraKSingh