Court No. - 7
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18273 of 2019 Applicant :- Dharmendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard Sri Satyendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Sinha, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in connection with Crime No. 171 of 2018, under Sections 147, 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 of I.P.C, Police Station Nagra, District Ballia.
As per prosecution case on 27.11.2018, Manish Yadav and his father Ramadhar Yadav were assaulted by the accused persons.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that general allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons. He submits that similarly placed co-accused namely Shiv Prasad Yadav and Hari Prasad Yadav have already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 8005 of 2019 and 8030 of 2019 vide order dated 18.04.2019. Lastly, it has been argued that the applicant is in jail since 26.02.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, the applicant be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A opposes the application for bail, however, he does not dispute the fact that the case of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Shiv Prasad Yadav and Hari Prasad Yadav, who have already been granted bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in particular the fact that similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Dharmendra Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) 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 I.P.C.
(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 I.P.C.
(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/her in accordance with law.
(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously 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 :- 30.4.2019 SK