Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused-applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 218 of 2020, under Sections 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Mahmudabad, District Sitapur.
The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of the bail plea of the accused-applicant by Additional Sessions Judge, new court of the POCSO Act and Rape Offence, court no. 15, Sitapur vide order dated 30.09.2020.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-pplicant has falsely been implicated in the case. He is neither named in the FIR nor identified at the time of alleged occurrence. A false recovery has been shown against the accused-applicant. It has further been submitted that co-accused, namely, Devendra Pratap Verma @ Ranu Verma, Vishwanath Pratap Singh @ B.P. and Jitendra Kumar @ Sonu, having similar role to that of present accused-applicant, have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 17.11.2020, 30.09.2020 and 22.07.2020 passed in Bail Nos. 8886 of 2020, 6748 of 2020 and 4801 of 2020 respectively. The accused-applicant is languishing in jail since 14.07.2020. Further submission is that there is no possibility of the accused-applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the accused-applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation, complicity of the accused-applicant, gravity of the offence and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the period for which he is in jail, I find force in the argument of learned counsel for the accused-applicant. The accused-applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let applicant-Balram Varma be released on bail in Case Crime No. 218 of 2020, under Sections 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Mahmudabad, District Sitapur, on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of 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 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.
Order Date :- 18.1.2021 kkv/