Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23133 of 2019 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Lal,Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mrs. Abhilasha Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. I.P. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Amit Kumar Singh with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 476 of 2018, under Sections 302, 120-B and 34 I.P.C., Police Station-Dadri, District-Gautam Budh Nagar, during the pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. and has been falsely implicated on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Smt. Suresh Devi, mother of deceased. As per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Satish, father of deceased on 18.6.2018 at 3:40 p.m., his son Anshul had gone to attend Jagran at the house of Raju at about 8:00 p.m. on 17.6.2018 and did not return till morning, rather his dead body was found near mango tree on Kasna canal Patri, on the other end of which a burnt scooty was standing. During investigation upon suspecting complicity of mother of deceased, she was enquired about one month after the incident wherein she confessed her crime by stating that she was having illicit relationship with the co-accused Kanhaiya Lal, a Tantrik and since her son Anshul was liquor/drug addict and involved in activities of theft, she hatched criminal conspiracy with the co-accused Kanhaiya lal, her son-in-law (Damad) i.e. Amit (applicant herein) and paid a sum of Rs.35,000/- to the applicant. Statements of Satendra, Sachin as well as Deepanshu, brother of deceased have been recorded thereafter, who made similar statements. None of the accused persons have assigned any role to applicant in causing death of deceased. It has further been stated that the applicant is not named in the first information report. His name has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Smt. Suresh Devi, i.e. mother of the deceased, wherein she has introduced the name of one Amit without showing his parentage. In the concerned village, there are about 6-7 persons of the same name. The Police only in order to conclude the investigation and harass the applicant, has implicated the applicant. There is no evidence on record which goes to show that the applicant is the same person, who has been named as Amit by the co-accused Smt. Suresh Devi. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused, namely, Sachin and Kanhiya Lal have already been enlarged on bail by the another Bench of this Court vide orders dated 5th December, 2018 and 11th February, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 42903 of 2018 and 47233 of 2018 respectively. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 7th March, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) 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.
(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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 3.6.2019 Sushil/-