Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32603 of 2018 Applicant :- Faisal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant involved in Case Crime No. 634 of 2015, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120B, 504 I.P.C., P.S.
Dhoomanganj, District Allahabad.
It is urged that the incident is of 2015; it is alleged by the informant that cousin sister along with driver was ambushed by seven nominated persons and killed on the spot; postmortem examination report shows multiple firearm injuries on the body of the deceased; nominated persons have been charge-sheeted and they are facing trial; after lapse of two years, wife of the driver filed a petition bearing Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 9674 of 2017 (Preeti Devi vs. State of U.P. & 10 others); this Court directed the District Superintendent of Police to look into the matter and take steps for proper investigation and to get the further investigation concluded expeditiously; pursuant thereof statement of three witnesses was recorded who claim to be eyewitness of the alleged incident but had not seen any of the accused persons causing firearm injury; witnesses in their statement stated that Abid Pradhan and his aides along with the applicant after firing were talking amongst themselves that they had executed the murder.
In this backdrop, it is urged that name of the applicant surfaced after more than two years; witnesses are close relatives and villagers of the same village but did not depose before the Investigating Officer; name of other thirteen persons including the applicant surfaced; there is no evidence against the applicant except statement of the witnesses; there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the alleged commission of the offence; criminal antecedent has been duly explained; applicant is languishing in jail since 27.11.2017,and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by 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-Faisal be released on bail in the above case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to following additional 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.
However, It is made clear that in case the applicant indulges in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 28.8.2018 Mukesh Kr.