Court No. - 59
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 233 of 2018 Applicant :- Gyanendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Pathak,Ashutosh Kumar Mishra,Ashvni Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Learned counsel for the applicant has filed counter affidavit which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
As per the prosecution case, deceased is alleged to have given money to his brother Vikram Singh and the applicant for procuring a job; on demanding the consideration, money was not returned; consequently, deceased was administered poison; deceased died while taking him to the hospital. It is alleged that the applicant while sitting with deceased on the rear seat of the car strangulated the deceased to death; postmortem examination report shows injury and the cause of death is strangulation; complainant was sitting in the from seat.
Learned counsel for the applicant urged that the F.I.R. and postmortem was conducted on the next day of the incidence; elder brother Vikram Singh is the witness to the punchnama;
F.I.R. was lodged belatedly after 28 days; it is a case of afterthought; on the third day of the incident the mother-in-law of the complainant filed a complaint making allegation against her and his brother of having caused death to the deceased; there is no other allegation against the applicant; chain of events do not link the applicant to the commission of the offence; applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent; applicant is languishing in jail since17.5.2017. If he is released on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Gyanendra involved in Case Crime No. 120 of 2017, under Sections 302 I.P.C., Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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 :- 30.8.2018 Saurabh