Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, against the impugned order dated 20.6.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 104 of 2019 (Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 81 of 2019, under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar. The Presiding Officer has rejected the bail application of the appellant vide impugned order dated 20.6.2019.
Counsel for the appellant has argued that in the First Information Report, the informant has informed that the appellants had an altercation with the deceased Shiv Kumar and on the way back the appellant killed Shiv Kumar at about 11:00 P.M. at night. A postmortem was conducted, the report of the postmortem has been placed on record and the cause of death is asphyxia and shock due to ante-mortem throttling.
The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the medical report suggests sexual activity by the deceased as is clear from the fact that semen was present. He further argues that there is no motive and appellant was the friend of the husband of the informant and used to work as a labourer at Ahmedabad along with husband of the informant. The appellant is in custody since 17.6.2019 and has no criminal antecedents. He further argues that there is no direct evidence to implicate the appellant.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the appeal.
In the above mentioned circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let appellant- Anubhav Alias Abhinav Alias Digambar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence.
(ii) The appellant 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.
(iii) The appellant 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.
(iv) In case, the appellant 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.
(v) The appellant 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.
Appeal is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 27.9.2019 SR