Court No. - 43
Reserved On.- 6.9.2018
Delivered On.- 20.9.2018
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9176 of 2017 Applicant :- Bhudev Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar,A.K. Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Heard Sri A Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.N. Mulla, the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Applicant- Bhudev Singh seeks bail in Case Crime No.857/2014, under Sections 364-A/302/120-B/201 IPC, P.S. Toondala, Firozabad.
The 1st bail of the applicant was rejected on 12.4.2016. The 2nd bail is pressed primarily on the ground of allegations made in para-8 of the supplementary affidavit dated 5.7.2018, wherein it is alleged that in the month of October, 2014, mobile no.7055835412 was used by unknown person in order to demand ransom from the 1st informant but the I.O never proceeded to trace out the subscriber of the mobile phone no.7055835412 and as per arrest memo dated 9.1.2015, mobile handset having I.M.E.I no. 352155060950454 and I.M.E.I No.352156060950452 was recovered from the applicant in which SIM Card No.9536708029 used by the applicant and as per CDR of the handset bearing I.M.E.I No.863234018064890, SIM Card No.7055835412 was never used and it has never been recorded in the case diary that from which source I.M.E.I No.863234018064890 came in the knowledge of the I.O. It is finally submitted that the applicant claims to have no previous criminal history, is in jail since 10.1.2015, undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail, trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future, he be enlarged on bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
The Court perused the C.D.R of mobile, having I.M.E.I. No.863234018064890 which was allegedly used by the applicant for demanding ransom through mobile no.7055838412, but the said fact is not reflected from the said C.D.R. Although, the learned A.G.A sought to controvert the allegations made in para-8 of the supplementary affidavit, on the strength of averments made in para-7 of the counter affidavit, but the said contention of the learned A.G.A is not supported by the said CDR on the contrary, prima facie substantiate the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following 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 :- 20.9.2018 Chandra