Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29992 of 2019 Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mohd. Shoaib Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Arvind Kumar Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 432 of 2018, under Sections 452, 354, 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C. and Sections 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station-Mudha Pandey, District-Moradabad during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations made in the first information report dated 21st July, 2018 lodged by Rakesh, on 20th July, 2018, when the informant went to market, and her daughter and wife, namely, Nisha and Savita respectively were cooking food in his house, the co-accused Harkesh, who was armed with country-made pistol, Nipendra and Arvind Kumar Yadav (applicant herein), who was gram pradhan, entered into his house forcefully and they dragged her daughter into a room and molested her and when his wife tried to save her, Arvind after taking country-made pistol from the co-accused Harkesh assaulted his wife, due to which she sustained injury on her head, and thereafter when his two sons, namely, Mohit and Sujit came to save them they have also been assaulted by applicant due to which they have sustained injuries. On shouting when neighbours came, they ran away threatening to kill them. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that from the statements of the victim namely, NIsha recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr. P.C., it is clear that there was an enmity between the first informant and the applicant, who was Gram Pradhan and because of the same, the first information report has been lodged against Arvind, Nipendra brother of Arvind and the co-accused Harkesh. As per the medical examination report, the injuries sustained by the injured, namely, Savita and Mohit, are not on vital part of their body. Though in the statement of the victim Nisha and injured Savita, the main role of assaulting the injured by country-made pistol has been assigned to applicant, but as per the medical examination reports of the injured, the same are not on the vital part their bodies. The applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated due election rivalry between the informant and the applicant. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the two co-accused, namely, Harkesh and Nipendra have already been enlarged on bail by this Bench vide orders dated 25th April, 2019 and 16th July, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 16694 of 2019 and 28246 of 2019 respectively. The applicant has no criminal history. It is next 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 8th June, 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 :- 26.7.2019 Sushil/-