Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35648 of 2018 Applicant :- Bhagirathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bakhteyar Yusuf,Santosh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raj Pal, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 12.03.2018 against four accused persons, namely, Bhagirathi, Akhilesh Kumar, Kamlesh Kumar, Vimlesh Kumar alleging that on 07.03.2018 they assaulted Ram Dular, Manju Devi, Kedarnath; Ram Dular received injury on head, resultantly died; other injured received injuries but simple in nature; independent witnesses have assigned the specific role of assault to co- accused Akhilesh Kumar of causing head injury to the deceased.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; there is no independent witness against the applicant; there is cross case, NCR No. 44 of 2018, against Devtadeebm Kedarnath, Jagganath (son of Ram Dular) and Jagganath (son of Jageswar); Vimlesh and Akhilesh have received injuries in cross case that has not been explained by the prosecution; at this stage it is not possible to decide who is aggressor; general role has been assigned against all accused persons; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 3.07.2018 having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Bhagirathi involved in Case Crime No. 105 of 2018, under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Mauaima, District Allahabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. One lac with two sureties (one should be of his family members) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 S.Prakash