Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Dinesh Sharma vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 April, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 7
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18247 of 2019 Applicant :- Dinesh Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Bahadur Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard Sri Amar Bahadur Maurya, 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. 73 of 2019, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 273 I.P.C and Section 60/63/63Ka of Excise Act, Police Station Badalpur, District Gautambudh Nagar.
As per prosecution case, against as many as twelve accused persons, case has been registered under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 273 I.P.C and Section 60/63 of Excise Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant Dinesh Sharma was working as free lancer driver and his services were engaged by Shanu Kumar Gupta and Anmol Gupta. He submits that applicant is a poor driver and was driving the vehicle for petty amount. He further submits that the main accused persons have already been named in the FIR and the applicant has been implicated on the basis of statement of co-accused Aman Sharma and Jitendra Singh, which is inadmissible against him. Lastly, it has been argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.02.2019 has no previous criminal antecedent, therefore, he be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in particular the detention of the accused-applicant and the fact that the main accused are different, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Dinesh Sharma 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
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dinesh Sharma vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 April, 2019
Judges
  • Pritinker Diwaker
Advocates
  • Amar Bahadur Maurya