Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14483 of 2021 Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Badan Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. R.B. Maurya, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State. Perused the record.
This bail application has been preferred by applicant, Arvind Kuamar Yadav, who is involved in Case Crime No. 13 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 471, 120B I.P.C. and 66D, 72 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and Section 4/10 U.P. Public Exam Act 1998, P.S.- Lohamandi, District- Agra, for seeking his enlargement on bail during pendency of trial.
Perusal of record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 2.2.2021 an F.I.R. dated 2.2.2021 was lodged by first informant Sunil Kumar and was registered as Case Crime No. 13 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 471, 120B I.P.C. and 66D, 72 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and Section 4/10 U.P. Public Exam Act 1998, P.S.- Lohamandi, District- Agra. In the aforesaid F.I.R. as many as 8 persons have been nominated as named accused.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number. Applicant is not named in F.I.R. Name of applicant has surfaced during course of investigation. Except for confesional statement, there is no other eveidence against applicant. Applicant is in jail since 7.2.2021. As such applicant has under gone more than three months of incarceration. Applicant is a man of clean antecedent, inasmuch as he has no criminal history, except the present one. It is next contended that co-accused Rajveer and Amanraj @ Vivek Yadav, have been enlarged on bail by this Court. Their bail orders have been place by learned counsel for applicant before Court. Same are taken on record. On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicant contends that for the facts and reasons recorded in bail orders pertaining to aforesaid accused, applicant is also liable to enlarged on bail. Case of present applicant is similar and identical to that of the above mentioned co-accused. Consequently, it is urged that present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. In case applicant is enlarged on bail he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Having heard the learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of the material brought on record as well as the complicity of applicant and without making any comment on the merits of the case, I find that applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Arvind Kumar Yadav, 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, 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 THE HIM/HER 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 7.4.2021 Arshad