Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 75 of 2021 Applicant :- Himanshu Jaisawal Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jeet Bahadur Singh,Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
2. This bail application has been filed by applicant Himanshu Jaiswal seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.312 of 2020 under Sections 395, 342, 506, 412 I.P.C., Police Station- Utraon, District Prayagraj (Allahabad) during pendency of trial.
3. Perusal of record shows that in respect of an incident which occurred on 22.8.2020, a delayed F.I.R. dated 26.8.2020 was lodged by first informant Gopal Lal Suthar which was registered as Case Crime No.312 of 2020 under Sections 395, 342, 506, 412 I.P.C., Police Station- Utraon, District Prayagraj (Allahabad). In the aforesaid F.I.R., four unnamed persons who arrived on the spot in Swift Car bearing registration No.UP-17- 3475 have been nominated as unnamed accused.
4. According to the prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R., it is alleged that unknown accused persons looted Trailer No.RJ-42-GA-0705, which was loaded with iron sticks (sariya) and was going from Sakambari Power Plant to Vrindavan, Mathura. Accused persons are also alleged to have looted the truck and ran away with goods belonging to the driver which were kept inside aforesaid vehicle.
5. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in above mentioned case crime number. Applicant is not named in the above mentioned F.I.R. Name of applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Ishtiyak @ Nanhe. It is then contended that there is no independent witness of recovery. Co-accused Manjit Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2020. Similarly co-accused Akhilesh Kumar Patel has also been enlarged on bail vide order dated 17.12.2020. Applicant is in jail since 6.9.2020. It is lastly contended that case of present applicant is similar and identical to aforesaid co-accused as such applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. Applicant has criminal antecedents to his credit but same has been explained in paragraph 12 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application.
6. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.
7. 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.
8. Let the applicant- Himanshu Jaiswal 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.
9. 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 :- 6.1.2021 Anil K. Sharma