Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52795 of 2021 Applicant :- Bantu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Punya Sheel Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material available on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.450 of 2021, under Sections 395, 412, 342, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Farah, District Mathura.
I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the impugned first information report and also the bail rejection order.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the first information report. From the possession of the applicant, one mobile and Rs.60/- are said to have been recovered. He further submits that as per recovery memo, 12 bundle iron rod are said to have been recovered from joint possession of 9 accused persons including the applicant. He further submits that nothing incriminating article has been recovered. The recovery that has been shown is false and fabricated. Similarly placed co-accused Abhishek, Neeraj, Rohit and Ranjeet Singh have already been granted bail by this Court, copy of bail orders have been placed on record. He further submits that the case of the accused has no substantial difference with that of the co-accused who has already been released on bail, and therefore, on principles of parity also the accused should be released on bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is having no previous criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 29.09.2021.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail. However, he does not dispute the fact that the similarly placed co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant-Bantu, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(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., 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, 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 him 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021/Ajeet