Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11408 of 2018 Applicant :- Boby Alias Pradeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Sri Ajay Kumar has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.
Heard Sri Anurag Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 358 of 2017, under Sections 147, 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Karhal, District- Mainpuri is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated. It is further submitted that the present case is hinges upon broken link of circumstantial evidence. There is no complicity to connect by the Investigation Officer of the case and during investigation implicating the applicant in the commission of the present crime. It is further submitted that a delayed missing report was lodged by one Nitish Kumar S/o Subhash Yadav on 22.7.2017 regarding disappearance of Sri Ravish Chandra who is said to have left his village Meethepur, Thana Karhal Mainpuri to Sitapur where he has to attend a Government meeting but there is no plausible explanation as to why this delayed missing report of 5 days was registered. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court that on 18.7.2017 unclaimed and unidentified dead body was recovered by Sub Inspector Chitbhawan Nahar, Thana Ikdil district Etwah for which G.D. entry was made on 18.7.2017. The inquest under post mortem of the dead body was conducted under the head of 'unknown male' and there was no external injury over the unknown dead body. According to the doctor the death is due to 'drowning'. Thereafter on 24.7.2017 the dead body was identified by the relative of Sri Ravish Chandra. After identifying the cloths and on that date itself the informant has raised some suspicion to the wife of the deceased Smt. Renu and her other accomplices, branding the wife Smt. Renu was the women of unchaste character. In this G.D. entry, for the first time, the name of the applicant figured up and statement was imaginary story was cooked up by the informant implicating Renu wife of Ravish Chandra implicating her sister Rupali @ Ruby, Ashish @ Sulla Bobby and three unknown persons. The police after taking into custody co-accused Ashish @ Sulla recovered one Towel who is alleged to have been used for rendering the deceased. But as per opinion of the doctor who has prepared the autopsy report of the deceased, that the cause of death of the deceased was due to 'drowning' only with no external injury over his person. After much efforts and deliberations and evidence of last seen was created by the witnesses during the investigation.
Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. During argument Sri Ajay Kumar has begin of the record with the allegation against the wife of the deceased branding her that she is the root cause of the entire unfortunate episode on the basis of imagination conjuncture and surmises. As mentioned above neither any motive or material collected by the police during investigation even indicating the involvement of the applicant in the present offence.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, 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 Boby Alias Pradeep, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, 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 THE HIM/HER 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 AK Pandey