Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23972 of 2021 Applicant :- Betu Dhimar @ Ganeshi Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.0055 of 2021, under Section 60(A), 60(2) Excise Act & 272 I.P.C., P.S. Panwadi, District Mahoba.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. was lodged against applicant and eight persons, co-accused Mister Yadav @ Astram and Narpat were arrested on the spot along with 105 liters illegal liquor and name of the applicant was surfaced in the statement of co-accused Mister Yadav @ Astram. It is further submits that co-accused Vikram Yadav @ Vijay Singh and and five other co-accused fled away from the spot and co-accused Vikram Yadav @ Vijay Singh and Sonam @ Shiv Kumar have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.23068 of 2021, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. 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. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 22.03.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Betu Dhimar @ Ganeshi 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 will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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 :- 29.7.2021 Jitendra Digitally signed by Justice Ali Zamin Date: 2021.07.29 16:37:13 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad